[mewzilla]

In 92, like AQ, I voted Perot. The horrific consequences to that decision will never be forgotten.

If you've got a better way to ensure a two party system, by all means, let's hear it. But voting for RINOs ain't gonna get it done.

[Roccus]

Hey, in 00, 04 and even today, I've never been in love with W. The consequences of having the opposition in power were more horrifying. I'm no apparatchik and have little use for them. But, sometimes ya just gotta differentiate between yer 'wants' and yer 'gots.'

[A.Hun]

Mewz, look at it as a fight between conservative and liberal. Even if Lieberman is a lib, he is more conservative than Lamont. That state is too liberal to elect a Republican, even a flaming lib RINO.

Go for the most conservative you can get elected...regardless of label. Yes, it is the lesser of two evils, but it is still a vote in the right direction, not a step in the opposite.

The WOT is forcing the nation further to the right, it will take time for it to affect the left coast and the northeast.

[MNJohnnie]

If you've got a better way to ensure a two party system,

And look what happened to Perotistas. Their "Reform" party has split into a half dozen irrelevant constantly squabbling forever minority party's.

It seems to me your fundamental principal is you just dislike the two party system. I guess I do not get that. Parliamentary systems require EVEN more compromising of principals to form a Government. If you object to RINOS, God help you in a parliamentary system that might require you to accept Democrats or Greenies or other moonbats in your cabinet to achieve the parliamentary majority to govern!