“You can’t assume Clinton would have had the vote of someone who hasn’t voted for her. That’s not how voting works. If you don’t give me your apple, I don’t have one less apple than any actual real situation that’s ever happened or is ever going to happen. I have one less apple than an imagined potential future…

This is not a new summary, this is what I have been saying the whole time. Your apples analogy is meaningless, and seems to assume a frankly astounding lack of intelligence on my part. Of course, “[i]f someone doesn’t give you an apple, you have the same number of apples you started with, not one less.” But I’m not…

And god damn it, Florida is now pretty much exactly on the fence. I’m already seeing motions to recuse RBG in my head.

Truth. Amendments 1 through 3 are the real ones. The first one says people can’t yell at you for saying the n-word, the second says you can bring your machine guns into Chipotle, and the third says you have to respect soldiers or something. All the other amendments are loopholes for liberals and Jews, or, God forbid,…

Starsucks?

Ah, got it. And agreed on the emails. 4th Amendment law probably won’t end up being the nation’s takeaway on the whole story, unfortunately.

Luckily for all the family-values and fiscal conservatives out there, he will surely pivot and become very Presidential and not embarrass them for four years after he is elected. And I mean, think of those sweet sweet judges.

But as Kerr pointed out, even under the standard doctrine as applied outside the realm of computers, the emails would have to be plainly incriminating at a glance, not just related to Clinton’s State Department communications such that there is a possibility further inquiry would yield classified material. It’s like…

“I also find it ironic that Democrats would know so little about democracy to think “not voting for Clinton means one less vote for Clinton”.”

“Voting for a candidate does not affect another candidate’s chances. Voting for a candidate adds a vote to the tally of that candidate, not to another candidate. Voting for a candidate adds a vote to the tally of that candidate, it does not remove a vote from the tally of another candidate.”

To be fair, I think the motivations were pretty mixed. But yeah, government action is more likely to be dictated by power than altruism. And the North didn’t like slavery in large part because in the northern factory economy at the time, it made more sense to just employ people for dirt-cheap wages than to house and…

There are a couple problems with what you are saying. Number one, Stein is actually likely the only current third party candidate with a net negative effect on Clinton’s chances. Overall, Johnson may actually help Hillary slightly, by giving disillusioned Republicans who would still never vote Hillary someone to vote…

Also, “[t]housands more whites fought and died for their freedom.”

““they are cop haters,” a user with Greene’s name wrote in the comments section of a YouTube video showing Greene holding the flag”

“Susan’s conscience has nothing to do with what YOU think will help others....It was to do with what SHE feels will help others. IT IS HER CONSCIENCE!”

That’s the point though. You can pretend that voting for Stein in this election is staying neutral, but it’s the neutrality of Switzerland with bank vaults full of Nazi gold. Not voting, or voting third party, means denying your vote to one of the major party candidates. Since one of the two (either Trump or Clinton)…

Yeah, but the whole point of a conscience is that it is supposed to compel you do do things that help others (right) rather than things that are self-satisfying but ultimately have a negative impact on the world around you (wrong). Voting for Stein ultimately doesn’t help anyone but you, and it has the potential power…

“Now that Trump is self-destructing, I feel even those in swing states have the opportunity to vote their conscience.”

“Hello, My name is William Johnson. I am a farmer and a white nationalist.”

I think this is why I really can’t agree with the people who say, “yeah, sure, Trump is bad, but electing him won’t really be an apocalyptic disaster for our nation, it will just be another lousy four years of politics.” Sure, Trump may not plunge us into nuclear war, or literally sell us to Russia. But, aside from…