There have been several intense exchanges over the last few weeks about voting for a third party helping Obama vs voting conscience. What about when a third party vote helps elect your choice, instead of stopping the greater of two evils, as most of you put it? I am glad some people in Florida decided to vote for Nader in 2000, or we probably would have had a President Gore. Not that Bush turned out all that great, but he caused a lot less damage than Gore would have. So in that case, would you have held to your principles about not voting for a third party as a wasted vote? If the election of 1968 had been one week later, Humphrey would probably have won, because Wallace was taking away votes from Nixon daily, and Nixon just barely hung on. Because at the time we did not know about Nixon what we do today, you would probably would not have wanted to see votes for Wallace defeat Nixon. I guess my question is, do you think a third party vote is always wasted as you do this year, with the ultimate goal of stopping Obama, or do you shift your position on third party votes dependent on who it helps? Does changing one's mind dependent of the outcome show a double standard?