[Mia T]

Don't leave so fast, Badray.

I re-read your comment and halfway concede your point about the typo (but not the substance, however.) ;)

Either version, yours or mine, is consistent with the basic thesis, although they are diametrically opposite as to causal relationship, i.e.,

THESIS: "By voting third party, or by sitting it out, you are voting for hillary clinton just as surely as if you placed an 'x' next to her name."

You vote 'no' for Rudy by voting 'yes' for hillary.--what I said

You vote 'yes' for hillary by voting 'no' for Rudy.--what you thought I meant to say

I said what I said because I see your voting (3rd party / hillary) as the act by which you vote 'no' for Rudy.

But your construction is also consistent with the thesis, although it would reverse cause and effect as I had meant it.

[Badray]

Okay, sure.