How is that a straw argument, much less incorrect?
***I already explained how it's a straw argument. The fact that you can't or won't see it is very telling. Best of luck in supporting whichever candidate you choose, because you're going to need it.
Notice that you handwave over the substance and then proceed with "You can be all pissed off that Hunter isn't running away with the race, but reality is what it is." Again, this is ANOTHER straw argument. This time it's even deeper because you're presuming to tell me how I feel (you can be all pissed off because..." which isn't the case at all.
By all means, do tell this forum who your candidate is and how you came to the conclusion that this candidate was best for America and the republican party. Knowing that you have been using classic fallacies in your decision making process so far, it will be easy to see where you go off into the weeds.
I see. You're right because you say you're right. Very convincing.
I'm not supporting any candidate at present. I have previously stated that I like Newt the most, but am not sure that he'll run, and that he probably can't win if he does.
But since you've dismissed me with your brilliant analysis of the fallacies of my decision making, I'll just let you convince the world that Duncan Hunter should and can win.