I don't think this is logical. A vote can, and often does, simply say: I would rather have X in this position than his opponent. In today's process, this is fairly well know: how much support X has for his policies versus how much his election is due to the weaknesses of his opponent.
Further, electing a slew of candidates that oppose X on many issues would say: I'd rather have X, but I don't support him on these issues and I'm supporting those who will oppose him on them at every turn.
Also, each vote is not the final vote. A president can face a hostile party, in the House and Senate, after his first mid-term (if not sooner.)
As another point, your question could also be reversed to: To allow Obama to be re-elected you have to accept his positions. I don't think this is true either.
Thanks for your courteous reply.
Pretty Woman- “We say who, we say when, we say how much.”
You say “who,” “when,” and “how much.” I, and others, won’t.