[Quickgun]

Romney would have been my LAST choice of the candidates that ran. I wanted a Perry-Palin ticket, or Palin-Perry. Didn’t matter to me who got their name first. But that is not to be.
And I won’t continuously argue with those that refuse to vote for Romney. I probably wouldn’t either,IF he wasn’t running against Obama.
Having said that, when the election comes, and the candidate are Obama and Romney, those that still refuse to pull it for Romney are:
1 Obama supporters.
2 do not really care about the nation.
3 weren’t going to vote, anyway.
And I won’t argue with those who claim Romney is no better than Obama, either. I’ve tried. I just don’t like having a battle of wits with an unarmed participant.

[Lakeshark]

BUMP to your post. Here’s a good article on how the two candidates are obviously the same...../s: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/david_maraniss_and_obamas_communist_mentor.html

[Elsie]

Having said that, when the election comes, and the candidate are Obama and Romney, those that still refuse to pull it for Romney are:
1 Obama supporters.
2 do not really care about the nation.
3 weren’t going to vote, anyway.

 

Bad logic.

Let's pretend an avid DEMOCRAT had said:

 

Having said that, when the election comes, and the candidates are Obama and Romney, those that still refuse to pull it for OBAMA are:
1 Romney supporters.
2 do not really care about the nation.
3 weren’t going to vote, anyway.

 

 

---

 

I just sent an e-mail to someone who has also drunk the "if you don't vote at all, it's a vote for Obama" koolaid:

 

 

 

Not to vote at all will surely mean a vote for the Marxist.

 

I can’t agree. There are THOUSANDS out there who will NOT vote for Obama AGAIN for ANY reason, and they don’t like Mitt, either.

 

Not voting for Obama or Mitt would be considered a vote FOR Mitt??

I don’t think logic supports that conclusion.