[jjsheridan5]

Cue the chorus of “But ANY R is better than a D! Once the Repubs get the Senate, things will improve! It’s the lesser of two evils! If you don’t vote for a RINO you are voting for a D!”

I am still planning on voting for the lesser of two evils. What has changed is that it has become abundantly clear that the greater of two evils is usually the GOP-e candidate. The democrat just provides a bad voting record. The GOP-e candidate will provide a slightly better voting record, but also can be counted on to do everything in their considerable power to neuter opposition to liberalism, something a democrat can only dream of doing.

[Crusher138]

Let me explain this for those of you who are getting all self-righteous about this or that candidate.

IN THE PRIMARIES you vote for the candidate that most fulfills your vision of the perfect candidate. If he is a good candidate, with good organization and backing, he will win. If he doesn’t have good organization or backing, he wasn’t that good of a candidate. You might have liked him, but you also might like liver and onions. Your taste/judgement just might be flawed.

IN THE GENERAL ELECTION you vote for the candidate that is CLOSEST to your ideal. Staying home because your candidate didn’t make it out of the primary means that you are helping the candidate you REALLY don’t like. The party will not go “shucks, darn, we should have gone with Candidate B instead of Candidate A.” They will see that the more liberal candidate won, so they obviously need a more liberal candidate themselves the next time around, since the more conservative candidate got such little support.

It may be flawed, but it is reality.