I stand corrected: a nonvote for a Republican is, in essense, a vote for the Democrat. Example:
There are five voters - Conserv1, Conserv2, Conserv3, Lib1, and Lib2. Under scenario 1, the three Cs decides to vote for the lesser of two evils - let’s say it’s John McCain. So the liberal candidate - let’s say Obama - loses. Under scenario 2, the three Cs decide they do not like McCain. So they stay home. Who wins?
So, as I said, a nonvote for the Republican is, in essence, a vote for the Democrat. That’s just a fact.
What utter folly. This is a simple matter of addition, and one I would assume any first grader could figure out. The actual tally in the scenario you described was R=0 D=2. if the vote of the Cons who stayed home were a vote for the Dem, that tally would be R=0, D=5.
Regardless of your rather poor math skills, McCain as the republican nominee results in "R=0", AS IT SHOULD BE, and as it predictably WILL be. Anyone who would vote for such as he is no Conservative, and should be divested of his VRWC patches, have his decoder ring smashed before his very eyes, before being pelted with fecal matter and urine, and cast out into the wilderness, never to return.
BAH! You may keep your filthy, unprincipled, betraying RINOs, and your damnable party too, if it must come to that.
There is but a single lesson for Republicans to learn, and yet they fail to see: Republican candidates must fulfill the needs of all three pillars of the Reagan Coalition, or they will surely lose, because the Conservative base will not show up in force to vote for them.
A candidate lacking in "strong defense", "fiscal responsibility/ small government", or "social conservatism", MUST be eliminated in the primary, for the sake of the coalition. That is the Great Compromise which we, as Reagan Conservatives, must endeavor to achieve. Any compromise beyond that should rightly be ignored, and rightly so.