[mikeus_maximus]

This is what happens when conservatives follow the GOP's "lesser of two evils" strategy. When you vote for someone who's not a conservative, don't act surprised when he doesn't act like one.

The GOP needs a wake-up smack on the head. Voting 3rd party and likely allowing a Dem to get voted in for the short term, is better than more Bushes for the long term.

[Corin Stormhands]

Voting 3rd party and likely allowing a Dem to get voted in for the short term, is better than more Bushes for the long term.

But didn't that exact "strategy" get us 8 years of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush?

[monocle]

So you would be content with the greatest of two evils?

[USPatriette]

"Voting 3rd party and likely allowing a Dem to get voted in for the short term, is better than more Bushes for the long term."

That would only be true if you had a chance of getting your 3rd party candidate elected. You don't.

[angkor]

Voting 3rd party and likely allowing a Dem to get voted in for the short term, is better than more Bushes for the long term.

You don't remember 1992? That is, 1992 though January 2001?

[BushisTheMan]

Remember, that brilliant strategy got us the WAR ON TERROR, secrets sold to the Chinese, politics of personal destruction, and a bit sucking sound under the White House desk.

[an amused spectator]

Voting 3rd party and likely allowing a Dem to get voted in for the short term, is better than more Bushes for the long term.

This veteran of the impeachment wars says yer wrong.