And you still blame the voter instead of the candidate!
I'll bet you blame the consumer when a store goes out of business or a product is discontinued.
Your attitude is just like the MSN attitudes that blame veiwers for not watching their programs or consumers who refuse to buy certain newspapers.
Third parties don't cause runners up to come in second; the candidate and his campaign do it themselves. If they cannot earn votes it is THEIR problem, not the third party's problem.
Once more and read my lips: voters do not OWE their vote to anyone and no candidate OWNS any votes!
And read my lips, if you vote for a 3rd Party candidate, you are EFFECTIVELY voting for one of the Major Parties, weather you want to admit it or not since the REALITY of the situation is, only one of the TWO Parties is going to win.
So, you started this discussion saying that voting for a 3rd Party DOESN'T effectively elect anyone, but have been shown wrong on that.
Now you want to shift the argument to the 'purity' viewpoint that the Major Party doesn't represent your views.
That is fine, but it doesn't change the reality that one of those Parties IS going to be get elected.
Democrat Majority Senate Leader Reid won a close election in Nevada and the Libertarians got something like 5% of the vote, EFFECTIVELY electing Reid, so they really 'taught' the GOP a lesson!
That seems to be the only reason for a 3rd Parties REAL existance, to punish the Party closest to them ideologically for not being doctrinally pure enough.
So, go waste your vote on Barr or Balwdin and feel good about your purity while we Republicans vote to keep the socialists from gaining total power.