I can respect those Freepers who honestly believe Romney is just as evil, damaging, and harmful to the US Republic as Obama is. I don’t buy that for a minute, but I respect those who honestly feel that way.
I have far less respect for those who say “well Romney is an abortionist, so I refuse to vote for him.” I respect their point of view if their religion precludes them from voting for any abortionist.
But in the context of my post about Sir Winston Churchill,
if we end up with Obama, we still get an abortionist. So what does one gain by wasting his vote by not voting for Romney, and ending up with the abortionist Obama.
A man like Churchill, if loath to vote for an abortionist, would still analyze with clear cool shrewdness that the next president was guaranteed to be an abortionist either way, and then would move on to the next issue at hand regarding the two candidates.
In this case, I know I am getting an abortionist, so I might as well vote for the one who might sign an Obamacare repeal, than for me to waste my vote and allow the re-election of the abortionist who will not sign an Obamacare repeal over his dead body.
I’m just bringing logic to the analysis instead of indulging in my emotional/spiritual sanctity of so many hear so they can feel good about their votes, even as the cut off my noses to spite their faces.
Extremely well said.
As you probably know, Churchill also said something about siding with the Devil if it would get rid of Hitler.
Equating Romney with Hitler is not rational.
I meant to say equating Romney to Obama is not rational.