Please ask for a citation that is relevant to the point you apparently are attempting to dispute. Then I would be glad to oblige.
I have already detailed in several posts upthread how it is that, in fact, no way around it, there are only two *viable* choices in the general election.
I agree that there are other choices, but they are not *viable.* Meaning: choosing them does not accomplish anything apart from determining which of the two viable candidates will be elected.
I would be glad to discuss this point with you if you’d be so kind as to engage what I’ve already written. Thanks.
My point is simply this: (and no, I’m not going to wade through this entire thread to save you effort...you either engage or you don’t) you clearly understand there is no “viable” way for disaffected pro-lifers to force their preferences, but at the same time you castigate them for deciding there is no “viable” way for their agenda to move forward by supporting those who would approach abortion on any but a principled stand.
In effect, you are trying to have your cake and eat it, too.