So ... a Democrat and an Independent who last time voted for Obama, but who this time vote third party, are still voting for Obama? Does your artithmetic calculate that Romney should be entitled, because you say so, to any vote of a person who declines Obama? Or is it different -- is the Democrat who votes third party this time, when he is scolded by a fellow Democrat that "that's the same as voting for Romney," which math is right, yours or the Democrat's who is doing the scolding?
You're confused, willfully. You are so angry at anyone who doesn't vote the way you want, that you lash out by saying, "It's the same as voting for Obama!" Just like the Democrat tells his disillusioned pal who votes third party, "It's the same as voting for Romney!"
Which proves that there's only ONE way to vote for a candidate: to mark his name on the ballot. Arithmetic is very clear on that.
OK, I’ll type slow for you:
Two people are running for an office. There are 4 people in the electorate.
Persons 1-2 vote for Candidate o. Person 3 votes for candidate R. Person 4 writes in “Sarah Palin.”
Who wins the election? What is the result of Person 4’s tantrum vote?
Simple arithmetic.
obama thanks you and yours for the vote for him. You can play word games until the cows come home, but a tantrum “I’ll just eat worms” vote is THE SAME AS a vote for obama (there, I tightened up that little word game you have played on so many responses here).
We have exactly 2 choices: obama or Romney. There is no 3rd option. If you do not vote for Romney, you increase the % of votes going to obama.
Period.