That's a pretty good synopsis.
The 'proportionalism' argument requires a filter--first filter is the "no-compromise" issues, such as abortion.
Next filter is "all the other" issues. Were there 2 candidates who both oppose abortion under all circumstances, but one of them promises to totally eliminate social services for the needy, then the OTHER gets the moral nod, e.g.
"Next filter is "all the other" issues. Were there 2 candidates who both oppose abortion under all circumstances, but one of them promises to totally eliminate social services for the needy, then the OTHER gets the moral nod, e.g."
The use of a filter analogy works well - effectively the first filter should comprise the 5 "non-negotiables" which Catholic Answers is pushing in its voter guide.
Wouldn't it be refreshing to have the problem of 2 candidates who both oppose abortion under all circumstances?
We need more problems like that! ;)