[paul544]

But you fail to say whether you will vote for Bush if it should be a "difficult and unfortunate" situation. A non-vote is the same as a vote for the Hildebeast.

[bootless]

Oh, please cut it out. That's not what I was talking about.

I'm not going to vote for some third-party candidate. I'll vote Republican unless Hildebeast is their candidate (Irony Alert). I saw what the Perot vote did to our country.

I was talking about the armchair vs. activist allegation you made about Freepers. You ever going to address that issue again?

[grania]

A non-vote is the same as a vote for the Hildebeast.

Paul, let me explain why this isn't true:

1. A non-vote only costs GWB one vote in that it only makes the differential (separation, difference) between the two tallies (sums) one closer.

2. A vote for the Hildebeast adds one vote to her total while it takes one vote from GWB's. That makes the tally closer by two votes (assuming GWB is ahead), it adds one vote to HC's total and subtracts one vote from GWB's.

3. A non vote is the same as a vote for a third party candidate, as it would do the same as "1", which is deduct one vote from GWB without adding to Hillary's column.

I'm sure that the GWB team has some very good mathematicians who know they can afford to lose some votes over virtually open borders, but would really fear a Democratic contender pro-secure borders advocates might vote for.