You're simply telling me I'm wrong and then restating my position. Sitting on one's hands because those candidates didn't share their position is precisely what I was saying; I never claimed it was some Machiavellian "positioning" or message-sending--I simply stated that 41 and 43 both suffered the wrath of voters who didn't share their beliefs. You can't get much more basic than that.
Nope you are still missing the point. They aren't sitting on their hands. They aren't invoking any wrath. They are just going about their lives as they always do. Elections simply aren't part of their lives. The only reason they make an exception to get up and vote is when they hear about someone who thinks just as they do. It is a subtle but important distinction.
It is the reason a whole bunch of new primary voters seemed to come from nowhere when Pat Robertson ran in 1988. It is the reason the marriage initiative on the California ballot in 2000 won by 62% (in California!). It is the reason why conservatives swept the California primaries that year winning under-funded longshot races up and down the state despite an open primary.
It's not about voters who occasionally remove themselves from the voting process, it is about unlikely voters who occasionally INCLUDE themselves in the voting process. If you don't get it at this point, you never will.