I am just asking for intellectual honesty.
If you DON'T vote for him, your vote is in essence cast for the Democrat, and you should admit that.
You don't have to like it, but it is the reality of the situation.
And once again, he has not 'squandered' votes of his base. He still has 90% of his base.
And I would ask you the same question as Howlin has asked others.
How would putting a Democrat in the Oval Office further YOUR goals, Sabertooth?
You can repeat a falsehood a thousand times, but it is still false.
If this is true then why do so many on FR get upset anytime anybody talks about staying home or voting for somebody else?
I'm trying to reconcile this, and not taking a poke at you - I have openly discussed not voting and/or writing in somebody or voting for somebody else, and have all but been labeled a danger to this country and been told that my vote will put a democrat in the WH (nevermind that I'm in Texas, lol).
If he has 90% of his base, those who get upset when somebody discusses not voting for him should chill out.
I'm voting for President Bush. I'm offering intellectual honesty. If there is a business I like to patronize, but the owner of that establishment alienates enough other customers that he goes out of business, whose fault is the bankruptcy? Should I rail at the lost customers? How are the goals of conservatism advanced if the President does things that cost more votes than are gained? Even if President Bush is reelected, and even if his Amnesty proposal for Illegals depresses turnout by only a few hundred thousand nationwide, that will cost GOP seats at all levels. How will this advance the WoT? How will this help turn back judicial activism? If there's a leak in the coalition, is your time better spent resenting the water, or convincing President Bush not to continue poking holes in the hull? |