I don’t think you know anything about her or her politics, but if you want to make a snap judgement based on one photo, who am I to try to stop you?

she was an invited guest who paid her own way to celebrate one of the new media outlets that would let her get her message out. she didn’t make the seating chart.

I meant the milk, but ok. farmers agree: calves are the farmers property as much as the cows are

babies don’t make milk. other animals don’t have property. You’re just anthropomorphizing.

just saying it doesn’t make it so. it’s perfectly natural to drink milk, and plenty of people aren’t lactose intolerant.

many naturally aren’t.

the 538 analysis showed he only decreased Clinton’s margin of victory.

the supreme Court made the difference

there is no way to know what would have happened if he hadn’t been in the race. you cannot prove a counterfactual.

do you also remember that the supreme Court stopped the vote counting and declared Bush the winner?

disengage

none of this proves her goal was to spoil the election.

Nader absolutely did spoil the 2000 election for Gore.

gore won that election.

Perot made it possible for Clinton to win over GHW Bush

this just isn’t so. analysis of that election found that perot actually cut into clinton’s margin of victory

you arguing against it marks you as a troll or an idiot.

i don’t tolerate abuse. i’ll accept your apology any time.

Republicans worked to get her on ballots,

this does not mean that her goal was to spoil the election. her goal was to win as many votes as she could.

according to the post-election analysis, ross perot decreased the margin of victory for clinton, and nader never spoiled any elections.

You’re the one that made the claim. if you can’t support it I have every reason to doubt it.

this doesn’t prove your claim.

disengage