Well, your moral stance still leaves a 1) VERY, VERY IMMENSE amount to be desired. You claim to want to stop an "evil candidate," from being elected, but you support another candidate who is also, 2) by definition, "evil," just in different, but 3) just as morally repugnant ways. And you 4) refuse to denounce the corrupt, rigged, and soft tyranny electoral system and forces the issue - criminally, including the crimes the alleged "Russian hackers," were accused, and many others - than only a member of these two entrenched massive organized crimes groups wins any but a pitiful number of elected offices - and, in fact, you seem to support this vast electoral scam, and refuse to see that is has reliably cheated and stolen the 5) choice from the American voters, and always assured the victory of a criminal, a traitor, a sellout, and usually an "evil," leader EVERY SINGLE ELECTION! 6) YOU SUPPORT EVIL! Even while 7) plaintiffly 8) going on about how much you oppose it. But that's because you're 9) knee-deep in it, and you can't even see it - or don't want to. 10) You know absolutely NO moral rectitude, and you certainly should NOT be 11) talking down to other posters from a "moral position," when you're morally bankrupt. And, I stand firmly by my belief that your "correction of grammar," is exactly what I said it is, despite your pitiful denial. I have 12) seen no empirical evidence to make me think otherwise on the matter.
