This sounds lofty, but it's wholly off the mark. This is POLITICS, for Pete's sake!
Like it or not, a political party is not a moral person. It is merely an organization, one that exists for the non-moral goal of winning elections.
If you want to be taken seriously in such an organization, you have to show that you contribute to the organization's goal. THAT IS ALL. A football team doesn't draft a player for any other reason than that they think he can and will play well. Nothing else is relevant or taken seriously. Indeed, if the player is constantly yammering about how he will only play if he agrees with the gameplan and so on, the team won't draft him or will look for the chance to cut him or will look for ways to replace him so they don't have to rely on an "unreliable" player. It's all completely pragmatic. So, while they may be valid reasons a person decides to stand on principle, it doesn't follow that the organization does or should give a rip about anything other than the *impact* of that person's decision on the organization's goals. Also, while many here seem to think that the *impact* of their decision to "stand on principle" by refusing to vote for McCain will be that the party will "get the message," "pay attention," "pay the price," history proves otherwise. Rather, the party will move on and try to find a way to win without the quitters. Again, it's just pragmatism.
....Indeed, if the player is constantly yammering about how he will only play if he agrees with the gameplan and so on, the team won't draft him or will look for the chance to cut him or will look for ways to replace him so they don't have to rely on an "unreliable" player...
I just want to make sure you did not misunderstand me, given my excellent English that is very possible -lol. You seem to have interpreted my comments as meaning "I," as in ONE PERSON ONLY, me.... "My beliefs, my feelings, etc," NOT AT ALL.
When I say "I," I mean "I" as part of a group... hopefully a group large enough to make a difference, such as the Evangelicals and others who share the same concerns although not necessarily religious people; like me:). In fact I would like to call it the Social-Conservative Party... (hmmm... has a nice ring to it doesn't it :)...
Ok, let's get serious: using you team analogy - although we are forcing the issue cause you get PAID for being a team member :), but let's try anyway, If "I" were the only idiot in the team causing trouble, I would not only be ignored but probably kicked out the team in no time. However, if 30% of the team, have the same strong feelings as I, and willing to take some kind of group action... THEN, they command attention.
If 30% of us - Huck's army for starters :) - abstain from voting for Macaca, we might make the difference and the message will be loud and clear.