[freedumb2003]

>>Dumb, the math-challenged are the ones who cannot comprehend that a third party vote is neutral, favoring neither Obama nor Romney.<<

You can repeat that until you are blue in the mouth and does not make it so.

If the electorate were 4 people, 2 voting for obozo, 1 for Romney and one has a tantrum and votes 3rd party who wins?

Simple arithmetic. The loss of a Romney vote is the same as a gain of an obama vote.

Quit repeating that nonsense. You are making yourself appear foolish over and over.

[Kevmo]

If the electorate were 4 people, 2 voting for obozo, 1 for Romney and one has a tantrum and votes 3rd party who wins?
***Conservatives already lost in your scenario. If it were a conservative candidate, 3 would vote for the conservative, 1 for Obozo, who wins?

[Finny]

Dumb, you really live up to your screen name, don't you? The electoral vote is one thing, and informed voters understand that depending on the state, their votes are distorted with regard to that electoral outcome. Who wins electorally if of those four votes, two are third party, and the other two are split between Obama and Romney? Who does it favor then?

The "temper tantrum" is all in your own insistence on demonizing those of us who won't vote the way you want. The mathematical fact remains: a third party vote favors neither Obama nor Romney in the end count, but more important, the goal with a third-party vote is to DENY THE WINNER A POPULAR MANDATE. You are stuck on a one-note samba of ABO, which has given you tunnel vision.