Fair enough. I am working under the assumption that someone that gets themselves up and out to vote will make a choice.

If, and only if, you're comfortable with Donald Trump being the result of that vote.

Cut off your nose to spite your face? That seems like a really good plan.

Are you being intentionally naive or are you just completely averse to doing any thinking on the subject at all? Because I have neither the time nor inclination to lead you all the way through this right now.

Granted. I also abhor CNN's tendency to put stack partisan pundits on the screen and call the shouting matches "news."

By and large, especially in Europe, terrorism at least cloaks itself in religion, and it draws a lot of support by doing so. It's part of the story, unpleasant as it is to acknowledge.

I think the reason is that these attacks are actually much harder to accomplish than it seems like. There's not a lot of people who are actually extremist enough to go the distance with it, and only a portion of that group are actually capable of doing so technically and without getting caught first. And, every time…

Or a hacked account.

You're probably one hundred percent right, because I don't think the current definition of "commercial" can support it. I don't think it would ever support the constant shareholder value increase that the corporate world demands.

That seems very suspect, given Easy's militant anti-racism stance.

By doing it in such a way that acted as blatant propaganda for the Republican candidate? Because Putin disliked Hillary Clinton, and would prefer Trump to deal with? Yes, that was subverting our elections.

I know its hard to read tone on the internet, but I'm assuming you're being facetious.

He was one of the more frustrating commenters around here because of a highly narrow way of looking at things, but even with his passion I never thought he approached ban-worthy.

I seem to not be smart enough to figure out how to do that properly. What finally pushed him over the edge?

Actually, I think there's an argument for that. Russia found a way to interfere with our election and put a finger on the scales in order to sway the electorate for one candidate over another. It might not be a physical attack, but it was a specific and directed subversion of our elections.

Perhaps he does, but his comment still is pretty fair.

No, nothing will ever change as long as people think that starting with the presidency is the way to build a third party. We've had viable third parties at times in the country, but it has to build from the grassroots or fracture from an existing party.

I voted for Jill Stein in 2016

Maybe the OP has a history of trolling that I'm not about to go sifting through, but his comment here is hardly trolling, and its nothing near alt-right. Simple disagreement shouldn't be enough to label someone as your enemy.

Not quite. I also find MSNBC and specifically Maddow's brand of liberalism to be far too smug and sensationalized, but they do have a significant advantage over Fox News: they do generally deal in facts, whereas Fox is happy to report any stupid bullshit that crops up, corroborating evidence be damned.