[Finny]

No, the only fool on this thread is the one who thinks that withholding a vote from Romney is the equivalent of voting for Obama. This is identical to the fool liberal who berates someone who has become so disgusted with Obama that they refuse to vote for Obama, as as voting "for" Romney.

A vote cast for a third party candidate in the presidential will have absolutely ZERO influence on the outcome of the O vs R contest. ZILCH. However, it WILL weaken the total vote count for BOTH Obama and Romney. Best case scanario: winner (O or R, it doesn't matter) wins on a 38% plurality because the remaining 62% voted AGAINST him either by voting for his opponent or third party. The weaker vote count for the victor, the more defensive and vulnerable he will be in office, and the BETTER CHANCE limited government conservatives will have in dominating him.

[bert]

Drivel.....
unless you love in california or New york, not voting for Mitt is a de facto vote for Obama.

You can rationalize till hell freezes over but it will not change the truth

[goseminoles]

An absent vote is a 0. A vote for Romney is a +1. A +1 is better than a 0. Don’t know how to explain it any more simple.. go to your voting booth!

[Windflier]

No, the only fool on this thread is the one who thinks that withholding a vote from Romney is the equivalent of voting for Obama.

Isn't it interesting that the hair-on-fire crowd considers it nearly treason for conservatives to actually vote.....conservative?

Sure, let's fight tyrannical liberalism by replacing the current uber-lib with another lib. Have you ever seen anything quite as nuts as this?

I'm all for facing the situation squarely, and admitting that we're in one helluva pickle, but I'm not going to try to fool myself or anyone else by putting lipstick on that pig.

[Elsie]

I shudda READ AHEAD!