HAHA ... right. The one guy who's actually done more to force people to buy health insurance than Obama.
We've been had folks. Unless people wake up and ... well nevermind that. Sheep to the slaughter.
Allow me to break this down for you logically, and then you may point out the flaw in my reasoning.
At this point it all depends on Congress. We'll need to elect reps and senators who will fight the mandate.
When it comes to the president, we're screwed pretty much equally whether Obama or Romney gets in. Which makes the rest of your argument sort of irrelevant,
but this part is an obvious error, so, for completeness sake:
If you vote third party ... it increases the probability of an Obama victory
Nope. Doesn't work that way. The only way for me to increase the chances of Obama winning is to vote for Obama.
Therefore, voting for Romney is undeniably the best course of action if your goal is the repeal of Obamacare
It's undeniably the worst. Romney has no principled objects to using government to herd people into the insurance industry pens. Even if he makes some token attempt to repeal PPACA, he'll pursue the same policy goals. I can't delude myself enough to make that obvious observation go away.
The reason it's actually slightly worse to vote for Romney is the aforementioned congressional opposition. The strongest opposition to the mandate will come from predominantly Republican reps. They'll be less likely to oppose Romney, whereas they will fight Obama at every turn.