That means that we protest that with which we disagree, and then, in the end, use our vote for what will be in the best interest of the country.
That's the rationale by which you determine how best to spend your vote. It is not universally applicable. It never will be.
Nor is your calculation of "what will be in the best interest of the country" going to be universally applicable in the ballot box.
Just as no one is going to change your vote by imposing their rationale on you, you won't change theirs by imposing yours on them.
This is political reality.
I voted for the first President Bush in 1992, with a big clothespin on my nose. I thought he was a wimp against the Democrats. However, I never trusted Clinton, and learned to loathe him. Perot was a whackjob.
Yet, I don't hold Clinton voters or Perot voters responsible for President Bush 41's failure to win votes from 1988 that were his to lose. That's 100% his fault, and the fault of any other politician in a similar circumstance.
That the current President Bush will lose more votes than he gains with his Illegal Alien Amnesty is such a certainty as to be axiomatic. Therefore, he is squandering votes for the sake of the Illegals. This ticks me off, not at those voters, but at President Bush.
Why is he risking so much for something that is not only wrong, but wildly unpopular?
President Bush's Amnesty for Illegals is not only not "what will be in the best interest of the country" in terms of policy, but also in terms of politics. It's going to cost GOP votes, whether you think it should or not. The more he pushes it, the more votes will be lost.
That's not in the best interest of the country.
Therefore, it's in the best interest of the country that President Bush cease and desist his efforts for Amnesty.
