I don’t want too much back-and-forth, but a vote for Ralph Nader was no more irresponsible than a…

Obviously, I am including “any of the other 8 3rd-party candidates” when I say “a Nader vote” in fact this is my official petition to make the definition of “a Nader vote” as: “anytime anyone votes for a third party candidate who has no possibility of winning.” Additionally, my piece focused on progressives who stayed at home OR voted third party *rather than* voted for the boring nominee of the major political party closest to their values. The Florida outcome would not have mattered if people had done that. You say “All Bernie supporters shouldn’t be expected to support Hillary Clinton” which I hear all the time, and it’s deeply irrational. Those people can’t deny that the green party’s values are closest to the values of the democrats. Ergo, when your party has no chance of winning, the logical thing to do is to pick the next most likely. Especially since so-called “green party voters” who support Sanders can only legally vote for him in the primaries if they switch to democrat. They are welcome to switch back to green after the election if they need to continue feeling like special snowflakes :) “Fast change, my change, or the highway” is EXACTLY why we can’t have nice, progressive, super lefty things. It’s the political version of fad dieting. Just as the only way to diet successfully over a long term is to make minor lifestyle changes over a boring and slow period, the only way to push a party more to the left is to compromise and show up for the boring, imperfect candidates who are most closely aligned to their ideal.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.