The country is going to need a Republican senate to undo the damage of four years of president Obama and two years of an unfettered Pelosi-Reid onslaught on liberty and common sense. I'm under no illusion that each of these so-called endorsements is for a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, in fact some are clearly RINOs, and not my cup of Tea. For example back in 2010, I volunteered and did get out the vote calling for Scott Brown in Massachusetts even though he's pretty weakly conservative. Since going on record as opposing Obamacare and promising to be the filibuster vote in the Senate, he's gone soft on a number of issues conservatives, myself included, aren't exactly thrilled about.
Fixing the country is one thing, but changing hearts and minds took decades for liberals to do and it will take more than a couple of years and disastrous Obama presidency to change hearts and minds back to reality.
Still, the main reason that any Republican is more appropriate than any Democrat at this point in time is even simpler and it was has been stated by numerous conservatives and libertarians alike - political leaders are servants of the people, not their masters. That means that the leaders voter select are instruments of voter intent, or should be. Here's the way I see it - if you are going to cut a slice of bread from a loaf, you need a knife, not a spoon. Any Democrat in this scenario is a spoon, and any Republican is a knife. Sure, some are butter knifes and some are actually knives designed for cutting bread, but any knife is a tool better used than a spoon for the purpose of cutting the loaf. There's a lot of cutting that needs to be done.
So yes, some of my endorsements are what I'd call aspartame endorsements - ones that leave an aftertaste that isn't necessarily pleasant. But they are endorsements that are necessary for now.