The only person whose panties are in a wad is yourself. And yes, ignoring what Dak does makes your opinion factually flawed.
So which of my facts is incorrect?
It's very simple. Dak could be the most amazing QB ever in the history and you're basically covering your eyes and saying that doesn't matter, you would put Romo in. That's a childish opinion.
Dak isn't the best QB in the history of ever, though, so that's not what I'm doing.
But yes, Dak cannot obtain the traits that I prefer in Romo in the span of time it takes Romo to come back. Eventually Romo would decline and that is when Dak would get the nod. We've covered this. I've already admitted that I am applying the "Romo basically can't lose his job to injury" theory here. It would have to be remarkably extraordinary for me to change my mind. Conversely, I'm of the opinion that a not insubstantial amount of what Dak is doing is because of the benefit of the running game and the OL (though this would apply to Romo as well obviously).
Sorry you are so upset that this is my opinion, but it is, in fact, a valid opinion, despite the fact that it is different than yours and you are wearing blinders and can't see that.
I might be incorrect in the long term as to which approach might net more playoff success but you don't know that any better than I do right now.