That's fine and dandy.
But the one with the most votes is the one sworn in. The various reasons the other voters voted for the other candidates are mere statical footnotes.
So, Gary got a vote that might otherwise have gone to not-Barry. Whoop-de-do! The Gary voter gets to feel good about himself, while the country suffers under Barry's rule!
Make up your mind. It is a vote for Gary or Barry. Don’t want barry? Then vote for the conservative. Not the liberal.
I’m not going to argue with the point you are trying to make about pragmatic voting, but using the same logic we can say a vote for Gary is a vote against Barack and against Mitt. You folks voting for Mitt are voting against Gary thereby enabling Barack to win and Gary to lose.
It is equally pragmatic to say the lesser of two evils is ... still evil. People could then argue that the evil of Barack is less than the evil of Mitt. If we want to fall into the trap pragmatism you are suggesting, then nothing ever changes because evil is never punished.
You market evil under the fear that there is never time to make a change because every election is life or death. We survived two Bushs, a Clinton and an Obama with cumulative damage to our country, most of which will be permanent without a radical change and rejection of elitism. The more damage that is done, the more people awaken to the elitist nightmare being foisted on us by your candidates and the Democrat candidates.
Your days are numbered. Our country will survive and we will take it back and restore it to good. It is your party that will die or fold in with the Democrats. The sooner the better.
So, what are you so upset about? Your 'electable' candidates are right out there waiting for your money. You can either try to earn our votes to help or you can just go sweep on to glorious victory. Right?
Here's a hint: insults gain you zero votes.