give up. Time and time again the same tactic over and over.

>candidates who come way closer to winning than Nader or
>Perot.
>
>When you're delusional you think it doesn't matter that Perot
>had no lasting organization and the great Nader had no lasting
>effect in the Green Party that helped Stein in 2016 in any way
>at all.
>

Using your logic and rules, Obama the only candidate you voted for will not have a lasting effect because Trump and the Republicans will repeal Obamacare and put two people on the Supreme court who are on the right of Hagan and Soytomayor.

>So when someone who isn't delusional says that you work with a
>party that has candidates who come closer to winning than a
>Nader or a Perot or a Stein (that is when we don't actually
>win with an Obama), delusional people think that you go the
>Nader, Perot and Stein route because "coming close" in a loss
>supposedly isn't a sign that the next time you might win.
>

If the party you are working with has a candidate that treated you like crap by signing a bill that locked up a large number of people that look you you or signed Glass-Steagall repeal and had another candidate that ignored you while helping everyone else. I guess you could call anyone who didn't go along with that delusional. In bizarro world

>See how delusions are fun?

No but I see the straw man.

---------------------------
Signature