This is an attempt to show why in general people need to be more then single issue voters.
It is also an attempt to show why 'all or nothing' is at best an immature view of politics.
If that is not your cup of tea then I suggest the back button.
First I want to posit something, this is only speaking in generalities. I am sure that if you tried hard enough you could come up with some specific scenario in which it had to be all or nothing; in which you had to not yield one inch. That however is the minority of scenarios (and I would assert a small minority at that)
Because I do not believe in wasting time, let us go to the heart of the matter. The central tenet of being a 'single issue' person is that your issue (whatever it may be) is the most important thing. Anything else pales in comparison.
Now I assert that such a statement is well wrong.
First there is the impracticality of such a statement. I can think of, off the top of my head, at least a dozen issues that could conceivably be 'sing issue' issues. Now what happens if everyone one of those issues and every voter becomes 'single issue'? Well for one we would have political gridlock as everyone scrambles to get their issue to the top for one. Compromise would be impossible as that would seem/feel like a betrayal of the issue and the passion behind that issue.
Second there is the such hubris and arrogance involved. Again I can think of at least a dozen issues that arguably are of critical importance. Each of which could be considered 'single issue' issues. What makes your issue so special? I am sure those that are single issue voters could name some. In fact I am sure that many of them might have convincing arguments, but what is it that objectively makes your issue more important? If I were to play devil's advocate could you show your issue is conclusively and objectively more important? I submit you can not. When it comes down to it, when you par down all the arguments the reality is that we subjectively choose the issues that are more important to us for a variety of reasons.
Last and perhaps most importantly is the insanity of such a position. Now I can guess what you are thinking, namely that such a statement is pure hyperbole. I assure you it is not and I can prove as much. Most of us watched over the 30 some years with abject horror as first Reagan and then a succession of Republican presidents and politicians used 'single issue' voters to vote against their interests. Think about that for a second please. After all the policies of the GOP are not a secret and they are clearly against the interests of most of the middle class. And yet it is the middle class that brought them into power and kept them in power. And it is all because of 'single issue' voters and being able to exploit those feelings. Now I do not know what others may think of that but I think the actions of those 'single issue' voters fits the definition of insanity. And for all the pain that these voters inflicted on themselves, what did they get? The answer is nothing, abortion is still legal, same sex marriage is gaining more stream all the time and most gun laws are still there.
So what does being 'single issue' really mean? It means being inflexible, arrogant and open to easy manipulation. It also means that you only really accept all or nothing.
And as I just showed, accepting all or nothing will only disappoint you. There is no way outside of seizing power and institutionalization of a tyranny to get exactly what you want.
Living in a democracy is about compromise.
I understand that probably is pretty harsh and might even be over the top, but I think people here are deluding themselves. So if you are angry with me after reading this, I ask you to think about why you are angry. Is it because I am so wrong? Or because I am so right?