Ah, you're going to make this easy for me then -- Your assertion boils down to "no vote for anyone but my guy is valid" for the simple reason that you repudiate the free choice for anyone else.
Illustrated:
A, B, & C are running for a position; the incumbent is A, your candidate is B, and C is another contender. You are saying that every vote for C is a vote for A, therefore if everyone voted for C it is the same as voting for and electing A, according to your statement -- therefore no vote other than that for your own candidate is valid.
Next question.
I thought that the "if you don't agree with us, your opinion doesn't count" attitude was the hallmark of the progressive mode of thought — what makes your attitude any different?
No, not at all, it's more math based.
Ah, you're going to make this easy for me then
No, actually, you made it easy for me. Here in liberal/welfare Maine, it worked in our favor. Our Republican governor won with 38% of the vote against a weak RAT and a whining "independent".
If the "independent" RAT hadn't pulled votes from the weak RAT, the weak RAT would have won. Or if the weak RAT had dropped out, the "independent" RAT would have won.
Applied to the last national election, if conservative knotheads hadn't been all over the map, or even worse, not on the map at all...
We could be beating up on Romney!