[so_real]

You are saying then, that in order to negate one ignorant vote cast for a "pro-mandate, pro-abortion, pro-bailout, pro-amnesty, pro-homosexualization, pro-guncontrol, pro-stimulus, pro-deathpanel candidate", I must necessarily cast my vote for a different "pro-mandate, pro-abortion, pro-bailout, pro-amnesty, pro-homosexualization, pro-guncontrol, pro-stimulus, pro-deathpanel candidate". And somehow, this vote of mine is not also "ignorant", and that my vote will win something more than "pro-mandate, pro-abortion, pro-bailout, pro-amnesty, pro-homosexualization, pro-guncontrol, pro-stimulus, and pro-deathpanel" leadership. This is peculiar logic. In my estimation, following this path only perpetuates the problem. After all, our support of John McCain has earned us his replacement, Mitt Romney.

[HiTech RedNeck]

You are bringing up the issue of knock-on effects in the political arena. And that may be a valid consideration. It may be like a game of chess in which one may choose to suffer setbacks to gain a later advantageous position (and then there is the debate about how). But you don’t need all that verbiage which simply emphasizes your passion.