Of course, the obvious alternative is vote against your ideals, just so an "electable" candidate wins the nomination. This worked out particularly well for the Republicans with Bush and McCain. Bush, by far the most electable candidate, was a fantastic president. He doubled the size of government, shredded the Bill of Rights, gave us the TSA, started two disastrous and unneeded wars, continued a monetary policy that would utterly destroy the American economy, and took the national debt to all time highs. But other than that, he was fantastic.
McCain made it possible for the least qualified, worst president in US history to be elected. Not to mention, a president McCain might have been worse. We'd be at war with Iran and probably North Korea, and the economy would still be a nightmare.
Maybe we ought to try "voting for a guy on principle," not just because the media tells us he's electable. Because that's really the situation that exists.
Conservatives often say "I like Ron Paul, but he's not electable"; a tidbit they gleaned from Fox News. Is it possible that the media, even (gasp) the Neocon News Network doesn't like Paul's message, and thus does all they can to ignore him? Failing that, they discredit and smear?
This Video kind of gives that impression:
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Indecision 2012 - Corn Polled Edition - Ron Paul & the Top Tier|