Proponents of the lesser of two evils, strike again!

[JRandomFreeper]

Nope. And your little game of 'support my liberal or you support their liberal' isn't going to make your liberal win next time.

You are responsible for the liberal state of the Republican party, because they KNOW they can count on your vote, regardless of how liberal a candidate they run.

Vote for your pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-amnesty, socialized medicine, big government candidate or I help the other pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-amnesty, socialized medicine, big government liberal.

I reject your premise. I will NOT vote for a liberal. Many others wouldn't also.

Run a liberal and lose in 2016.

It's that simple.

/johnny

[Manic_Episode]

By voting party over principle the GOP was enabled, encouraged and motivated to move to the left and run a pro baby murder candidate.

In the short term you are correct in saying not voting for Mitt gave us Obama. This is however myopic. In the long run your near sighted strategy destroys conservatism by giving us more and more liberal candidates.

True conservatives recognize the absurdity of being told we need to vote for a liberal to promote conservatism, or we need to vote for a pro baby murder candidate to stop abortion.

True conservatives balked.

Your strategy gave us Obama.

You did this.

[D-fendr]

By your logic, you’re encouraging Democrats to move left - it works for them when you don’t vote for their GOP opponent.

The sane way is to work for conservatives in the primary. If you can’t win there, you can’t win in the general.