In the general election, the ballot doesn't have anything on it about which Republican candidate I'd prefer. It just has a choice of the Republican or the Democrat. In this particular election, of 2008, I already know enough to see that whomever will be the Democrat candidate (Hillary, Obama or Edwards) will be worse than any of the Republican candidates. So I know I will vote Republican in the general election.
In the general election in particular, I always vote as if the election were so close that it happened to be my vote that decided it. I'd have trouble sleeping at night if it ever turned out that Hillary gained the office of President because I was busy making some "statement" that the other guy was an unacceptable RINO .. for any of the RINO's, liars, and fools currently on the Republican ballot. Some of those so called Republicans suck pretty bad, but none nearly as bad as Hillary or Obama.
Pretty straight forward logic, don't you think?
It's not always this way; if say we put up McCain on the Republican ticket, against Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller on the Democrat ticket, I'd have to give serious consideration to voting Democrat. Better an honest liberal of stable temperment than a lying liberal with a rage issue.
I'll pick the .22, thank-you. I might live.
No, but fortunately enough Conservatives will boycott a RINO Republican nominee that your vote, and those of your fellows will make no difference.
there is no benefit in strengthening the ranks of the Rinos in their folly. They need to be taken from power.
The enemy within is far worse than the enemy beyond the gate, as the immigration flap should prove on it's face. Or the stripping of eminent domain, or the selling of our ports to foreign governments, or the limiting of our sovereignty as in the LOST at sea treaty... etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Al these and more pushed upon us by Republicans
In the general election in particular, I always vote as if the election were so close that it happened to be my vote that decided it.
***Then you should vote that way in the primaries as well.
I’d have trouble sleeping at night if it ever turned out that Hillary gained the office of President because I was busy making some “statement” that the other guy was an unacceptable RINO .. for any of the RINO’s, liars, and fools currently on the Republican ballot.
***Then welcome to insomnia-land. Your actions on this thread are being mirrored and replicated throughout the political discourse in the GOP today. Thousands of RINOs like you are discouraging prolife, evangelical staunch conservatives. If a RINO gets nominated, millions will feel disenfranchised. All because guys like you were making their own “statement” about electability, and as a result, they lost the election.
Some of those so called Republicans suck pretty bad, but none nearly as bad as Hillary or Obama.
***I’d rather fight the enemy in front of me rather than get stabbed in the back by a pretender friend.
Pretty straight forward logic, don’t you think?
***I agree, if you want to lose an election and make a “statement”. As Smokin’ Joe said, “Nice to have the votes, but if they aren’t that picky, then let us have a Conservative, for once, as a candidate. Why? because it doesn’t matter how pretty or slick they are, to Conservatives, the issues matter. There are some things we just won’t vote for, and if there is nothing to vote against (I.E. no difference between the candidates on the issues) we just might go fishing.” So you do the math, Mr. Realist, and figure out what kind of candidate brings in the most votes: a conservative. That’s why so many RINOs run for the presidency and climb all over themselves trying to look like the most conservative.
Better an honest liberal of stable temperment than a lying liberal with a rage issue.
***This last statement kinda negates everything else you say.
There’s one other thing going on here. Social Conservatives know that they bring a large contingent and if they’re disenfranchised, they’ll speak with their fishing poles. What’s going on now in the GOP is a tug of war over evangelicals. Look at how well Huckster’s doing. It’s because of Evies. But there is outright hostility towards evangelicals from some factions in the GOP. So when these socialLiberal FiscalConservative types claim that they’d support the social conservative, in reality they merely begrudgingly accept them and in several underhanded fashions they are actively against socons. The pretenders act like the socon branch of the GOP is okay with them, but if they’re honest, they basically admit they’d rather not have them and wish the party could do without them. That’s the tootyfruityrudy support right there. But by being fake, underhanded and lying about their conservatism, they create the tension that exists in this party where the claim is to be conservative but the actions are liberal. I simply don’t care about republicans like this because by lying to us, they betray their own “principles” and their “principles” are weak. For socons to vote for a solib, they must betray their principles. For a solib fiscon to vote for a socon, supposedly there’s no betrayal of principle, because they have no real principles. For instance, what is the operating principle behind globalism other than exploitation? Give me good, solid, godly, conservative American values every day over that nonsense.