[OneWingedShark]

>>But understand this: Anti-voting is not going to get ANY Repug elected. We have to have a reason to vote FOR someone - or they won’t win.
>
> That happens in the primaries. Once we get to the GE we can only vote for the most conservative candidate even if the most conservative candidate isn’t very conservative.
>
> Not voting is the same as voting for the opposition (see my arithmetic notations upthread).

Except that you group voting third party in with not voting; so, in essence you are saying that a vote does not count unless it agrees with your desires.
How is that any different than the philosophy of the Statists, you know, the ones who 'deem' things to pass?

[marron]

They will tell you that a vote for third party is a vote for the Dems.

What it really is, though, is a vote the Repubs could have had and drove away.

In choosing their next candidate the Repubs need to factor in just how many potential votes they can afford to alienate by running a guy the rank and file cannot abide.