"I would save the Union."

I was thinking about a letter Abraham Lincoln wrote back in 1862, in response to the often-mercurial newspaper publisher Horace Greeley. I'll quote it in full.

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.
Hon. Horace Greeley: 

Dear Sir. 

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right. 

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt. 

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free. 

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

I will rewrite this letter based on my current orientation to the GOP race, and how I would like other Republicans to think about the race.

I would stop Trump. I would stop Trump the shortest way in the Republican nominating process. The sooner Trump can be stopped; the quicker the Republicans can set about repairing the damage he has done. If there be those who would not stop Trump, unless they could at the same time elevate Cruz, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not stop Trump unless they could at the same time elevate Rubio, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to stop Trump, and is not either to promote Rubio or Cruz. If I could stop Trump with Jeb Bush as the nominee I would do it; if I could stop Trump with John Kasich as the nominee I would do it; and if I could stop Trump with Mitt Romney as the nominee, I would do it. What I do in this election, I do because I believe it helps to stop Trump, and what I forbear, I forbear because I believe it assists Trump. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

Because this is my broader orientation to the race, I rank the candidates based on the likelihood that they beat Trump in a head-to-head contest. I see Rubio as most likely, followed by Kasich, followed by Cruz, followed by Jeb.

The main reason why I am hesitant to go for Cruz, even though he is best positioned currently, is that the antics of Chuck Grassley, Rudy Giuliani, and Orrin Hatch offering succor to Trump in the run-up to Iowa scared me. I don't like being scared into a given decision, but again, my top priority is to stop Trump, not to prove a point about brinkmanship. If I believed strongly that Cruz would beat Trump in a head-to-head, I would have already moved to Cruz. But I simply do not have enough confidence in Cruz to go that route.

Likewise, I have difficulty seeing Jeb Bush beat Trump in a head-to-head, considering the amount of ill will he has earned in this campaign, and how little return on investment he has gotten so far.

That leaves Kasich and Rubio. I vastly prefer Rubio as a candidate; I think he is a better messenger and better informed about the issues that the country faces today. But I would happily vote for any of the four alternatives--or anyone else not running that decided to run--if I believed that they were the best way to stop Trump.