^ If so, then what? What do we do? Doing nothing is taking McCain OR the alternatives. There has to be something to do that is more than nothing.
The truth of the last statement depends on what you mean by it. If you mean there still has to be something to do more than nothing in order to have a fully satisfactory president in the next term, the statement is untrue. The next president will be McCain, Clinton or BHO. Nothing you do will change that.
Your only choice is which it will be. Fail to vote against the dem effectively, and you increase their chances of taking the office.
If one's own personal statement of protest is more important the the result of this election, then one can in good conscience cast a boutique vote that detracts from McCain's tally and gives the dems greater relative strength.
I do note there are many places where a 100,000 votes one way or another don't matter, and I think that kind of personal statement voting is more rational in those places.
If you mean that issue advocacy can continue, I agree. Conservatives made an error of judgment in the early 1970s by muting their criticisms of Nixon because Nixon was beseiged by the left. Some rightward preassure might have helped Nixon.
Liberals and democrats generally let their emotions dictate their beliefs.
And in this election, quite a few conservatives are permitting their decision to be driven by a puerile anger, an emotion.
I just don't think that is logical. We wouldn't choose "second best" in hardly any other aspect of our own lives, yet some of us are willing to nominate the "2nd best" candidate to the most powerful office of the world. That just doesn't make sense to me.
It may not make sense because the analysis is disjointed. The nomination fight is over. Screwing up a general election so the fourth best wins over the second best is perverse.
If you like him, if he seems to support your views more than the other candidates, then you should vote for him. Voting for a candidate you agree with less because you don't think your favorite candidate can win only rewards the mediocre candidate.
A federal election is not a reward for excellence, it is a method for choosing the exec. You will two and only two choices of people to hold that office. Refusing to make a choice is also a choice of a kind.
My liking Bob Barr should not leave blinkered as to how to vote; that would allow an emotion to dictate the decision. One would optimally make a choice in voting on who it will put in the office.