<human>: Could you distill the essence of the text into 1-3 sentences?

Ok, the question might be a bit provocative, but I'm a Finn and we recently had a presidential election. We have a multiparty system and don't really have primaries either, but there are some similarities in our presidential elections and yours. Here the parties set the candidates and then there is a first round. If no-one gets over 50% of the vote, there is a second round. 

Now, like in previous elections many people utilised the power of the strategic vote. For example, the conservative candidate, Niinistö, now president-elect, had a large poll-lead against his other opponents and it was pretty sure he would go to the next round. Thus alot of his supporters decided to use their vote to **prevent** candidates from parties they disliked  reaching the next round by voting for someone they didn't prefer over Niinistö but would rather see in the next round against him then the candidate they detest the most.

The situation of course is not similar there, but the point is the same. You can use voting to set the playing-field for the next round, in a situation where one is likely to take place. 

We know that there will be a general election so why aren't Obama's (guessing most Redditors are) supporters/those who prefer him over republicans trying to get the worst possible Republican candidate elected in the primaries.

 I mean you have this great opportunity but instead of promoting people like Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich over Romney , I see only posts, links and comments bashing those candidates. Is this an indication that you've neglected the power of the strategic vote? Is it so hard to register as Republican before the elections?
<bot>: If you want Obama elected, try to get the least electable Republican to the general election - isn't this obvious? Why isn't anyone in the US doing anything about it?