You really have a low opinion of tyrants’ ability to override the constitutional process (that’s what tyrants do, however), and a high opinion, of Congress (and the right’s integrity), if you believe that a tyrant on the right couldn’t succeed in being a tyrant or would of course be impeached AND CONVICTED and removed from office. Remember that there’s a very high bar for conviction, and tyrants use coercion, money, threats, and blackmail on people to sway their votes.

In addition, I don’t think I’ve ever written anything resembling the thought that people must always vote for the Republican. I have asserted, in the elections that have occurred since I’ve been writing this blog, that the Republican candidates, though,\ flawed, have been so far above the Democratic ones that it is simply no contest, so anyone who voted third party or abstained because of little quibbles with McCain or Romney versus Obama (I had just started blogging in 2004, so the topic didn’t really come up re Kerry and Bush) was casting a vote for Obama, clearly a far worse choice.

If that’s not the case in 2016 (and I have not made up my mind on that at the moment, nor do I need to) then the situation is different.

The game can be neither won nor lost with the vote, although any faction that limits its gameplay to electoral politics all but assures it will eventually lose the game to factions that play the game along the full spectrum of social culture and politics.

The game is the game.

Truculent = Nietzschean ressentiment. It’s just a manifestation of the Marxist method in a strategic application.

Keep in mind it’s not just GOPe being targeted by them for replacement. Mainstream conservatives, other’ed as “cuckservatives”, are also being targeted.

You are of course, free to do as you wish. We KNOW that whomever the Democrat nominee, they will lie through their teeth, even Sanders, since the end justifies the means.

Fear of a Republican tyrant is misplaced, since the Democrats would vote to impeach in a heartbeat and, depending upon whether the tyrant were RINO or conservative, either RINOS or conservatives would join in that vote. Only if it’s a Democrat tyrant is that remedy absent.

I’m simply pointing out that, if you are to avoid hypocracy, your own rationale leaves you no other choice. I’m sorry if that’s distressing but there it is…

If that Republican nominee was lying through his/her teeth. If that Republican nominee was going to become a tyrant. Etc. etc., and it would also depend on who the Democratic nominee was (I’m not sure that Hillary Clinton will be the one).

I’ve certainly considered a Trump/Clinton race in the past. I’ve even talked about it and written about it. I refuse, however, to consider it at the moment, particularly in the sense of answering questions about what I would do, because I don’t have to decide right now. I will think about it seriously if I am actually faced with it, and after hearing many many months more of talk from Trump.

That’s merely sensible. I don’t have to decide about something right now that makes me want to puke, so why should I? Just to answer a question on a blog?

Given the left’s machinations and direction of the democrat party, given the left’s goals… by what calculus might you ever imagine that any Republican candidate could be worse that the democrat nominee?

A refusal to even consider a highly possible situation is avoidance. Avoidance is based in fear. Fear is natural and may be justified, but avoiding the facing of our fears, places them in control, which is the price of avoidance.

Yes, it would ordinarily apply, but only if I believe the Democratic nominee is worse than the Republican one. If I thought the Republican one was worse, then I shouldn’t vote for him/her. I can easily imagine a situation like that, although I’m not saying the present one will be that situation.

At the moment, however, since I detest both Clinton and Trump (for different reasons), I refuse to consider the situation.

You certainly have the right “to cross that bridge” if it should arise. However, your oft repeated rationale that, not voting for a RINO nominee is in effect a vote for the democrat nominee… logically applies to a Trump nomination as well. By your own reasoning, not voting is not an option, nor is voting for any other than the Republican nominee… because there is no alternative to denying the democrats a follow up Presidency to Obama’s.

If Trump is the nominee, you’re prior reasoning would result in being ‘hoisted upon your own petard’ ;-).

parker,
See above. How does neo’s rationale not also apply to your position? Do you actually equate Trump’s egotism and social liberalism with Hillary’s mendacious leftism?

KLS,

You are welcome. Our goal is double digits above the donald. Then I will, because I am retired and with the blessing of Mrs. parker, knock on doors in NH. Cruz is the first presidential candidate since Reagan to garner my 100% support. End times.