[SuzyQue]

Well, because:
1) this is exactly how 0bama got into office last time, and because
2) in spite of all of the hyperventilating, hyperbole, and righteous anger, even a moderate or RINO will be less harmful than the big 0.

It’s ugly, but there it is.

[JoanVarga]

Point 1) is not how Obama got elected. He did not get elected because people sat it out in protest in any sort of numbers. And 2) is where I need convincing on the terms of endearment from Romney. Obamacare is HUGE in scope and reach and treachery.

[mikeus_maximus]

Well, because: 1) this is exactly how 0bama got into office last time, and because 2) in spite of all of the hyperventilating, hyperbole, and righteous anger, even a moderate or RINO will be less harmful than the big 0. It’s ugly, but there it is.

I understand; that's been the conventional thinking for decades. It's how we got saddled with Bailout Bush and how we got where we are today-- GOP candidates with Big Gov't principles cloaking themselves in the "conservative" mantle only for election purposes. If you like where we're going, then keep doing the same things. Whether we run with an avowed Dem liberal or jog there with a GOP leftist, we'll end up in the same place. And we're getting very close to it. Only a radical u-turn will make any difference for our kids.

[ShadowAce]

...even a moderate or RINO will be less harmful than the big 0.

Less harmful is still harmful.

Less harmful also means more time before the breaking point is reached. That means more pain overall.

We need to reach that point sooner rather than later so we can fix what is really broken.

[dforest]

I care about my kids and grandkids to sit home in a snit.

[sport]

Is it best to be shot with a .22 or a .45 is what you are saying.

[EagleInGA]

Well, because:

1) this is exactly how 0bama got into office last time, and because

2) in spite of all of the hyperventilating, hyperbole, and righteous anger, even a moderate or RINO will be less harmful than the big 0.

It’s ugly, but there it is.

I disagree. At best we are looking at 4-years of liberal policies under Romney and at worst 8-years. Then there is post-Romney which, if history is any indication, will be a backlash against "conservative" principles (i.e. liberal incorrectly labeled) leading to a minimum of 4-more years liberal years ... and all the while Conservatives in Congress getting dragged down by their weak leader!!

I'll take my chances with 4 more years of Obama, and work for a Conservative congress to neutor his actions. I'll NEVER vote for the liberal from Mass.

[Sam Gamgee]

You have a point. I'd almost be willing to vote for a shoe over Obama. But I have a real problem with Mitt as the candidate. I just don't know. How did we get here again with the most liberal of the bunch?