Right below this comment you are calling out and “individual voter” for not voting Clinton. Nice consistency, there, meathead. 

Nader actually accomplished shit in his life, which is the chief difference between him and every other green party candidate. Did he fuck everything up? Yes. But so did Gore by not picking a running mate strategically, and Nader earned that right by actually getting shit done for 20 years prior

I have a feeling that this was your first election where you were engaged but when you’ve seen as many come and go as I have, you’ll be able to step back and view them a bit more dispassionately.

I’m from the upper Midwest.

Nobody on this website voted Trump. I mean, somebody did, but like 1/100, and the readership is not large enough for that to be significant in any significant state

Honestly, when Bush stole the election in 2000, that was a bigger deal. That was the point of no return on the real issue that our children will face: climate change

Yeah but in the NFL they just call subjective rules (pass interference) when Tom Brady is about to lose to the Jags in the playoffs.

Completion percentages on passes to Olsen since 2012: 66%, 66%, 68%, 62%, 62% (left out 2017 because Olsen was injured).

Are you suggesting that there is a demographic of people open to white supremacy but just not quite over the edge who don’t typically like NPR but also regularly check NPR to see if they want to listen to it today and then heard this guy and became white supremacists?

So are you suggesting that people tuning in the National Public Radio are going to be swayed by this man’s compelling arguments that BET represents a major social problem in the USA?

Says the man whose base is 100% motivated by outrage at something they are unable to define (obsolescence, its obsolescence you t-shirt buying dolts!)

Paul Ryan looks like a knock-off aaron rodgers

Once Weezer covered “Africa” Cuomo endorsed the band, at which point what everyone already knew was proved: Weezer is bad. 

IDK, old people have nothing to do so voting is like a big event for them, like their birthday or the time they get to take the tiny dog they have that hates them to the vet. These people vote R

I understand what you’re saying. It’s not a compelling argument. Relative share of wealth is a useful metric. It tells us how much people have, which is relevant regardless of how much of what they have is liquid.

That’s how you’re going to choose to rationalize this? They’re giving so much less than what they could otherwise afford because so much of their net worth is tied up in assets and investments?

I live in a really brown neighborhood and am white. I am also one of the people who makes the most money in my neighborhood (if I had to guess).

Yeah and it takes a very specific type of asshole to see this and immediately cry “this is unfair because I have so many more assets! Why can’t you put yourselves in my (much nicer) shoes!?”

Yes, and if you have $1,000 and somebody else has $100

We get how percentages work. I think the argument is more that net worth is not equal to disposable income, which would be a more appropriate metric to display against charitable donations.