I commend you on your honesty. Unlike most hostile "you-must-vote-for-Romney" types, you at least admit that your voting is based on pragmatism and not principles. Although I came to a different decision on how to vote, at least, I can understand why you came to your decision.
I disagree with your reasoning in #1 above. Actually, a far better outcome for conservatives would be for Romney to squeak by with the thinnest of margins while Tea Party conservatives win handily. Even the Romney people would realize that the people didn't want him and only voted for Romney because he wasn't Obama. The mandate would lie with the Tea Partiers who were elected to block the big-government agenda of both Romney and Obama. Romney would realize that he must take a hard turn to the right or else. If Romney wins big, he concludes that he has a mandate, governs by his instincts (which we all know are leftist), and uses his clout as President to force the Tea Party to his position.
Make no mistake about it - I don't want either of these clowns as President. However, I think that my strategy of withholding a vote from a Republican candidate who pushes liberal policies while voting for conservatives down the ticket is a wise one and does more for conservatism in the long run than blindly voting for Romney because he has an R behind his name.
What we must guard against is creating internal strife within a common cause. I still liken this to a battlefield and would go back to that for an analogy. In wars there are bad decisions, bad strategies, and stupid mistakes. Winners do not fixate on them, but rather move on to the next task at hand and try a different tactic. I also believe in broad front tactics. Interestingly, your ‘best case’ scenario wouldn't be possible if everyone committed to your strategy. Thus, in your best case scenario, we would both be choosing the right course of action. Wars take small and large unit actions.
The only thing that I'm very, very certain of going forward is that we have already passed a tipping point. Things are likely to change quickly and radically in our near future. We need to be ready to come together when that happens, no matter what past tactical mistakes we assign to each other.
Instead of picking at scabs with this type of article, I would recommend that you be straight forward about your strategy and reasons for it here on FR (as you have laid out in your responses to me). Yes, you will find many if not most disagree with your plan of action, but I think the vast majority agree with the summation of the problem. Regardless, your input and reasoning are valuable points for everyone to consider.