as if anyone would need another reason not to vote for Trump:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...in-is-gay.html

I don't get why someone should not vote for Trump because a white-nationalist bozo supports him?

Should someone not vote for Clinton because a racist supports her?

Does Clinton not seek to divide and conquer as well?

It's not just one white nationalist bozo. It's the entire movement who loves him.

if 99.9% of the BLM activists who violently rioted are voting for Hillary, does that mean that someone who supports Hillary's views on a number of important issues, but doesn't support rioting should not vote for her?

No, but I think the company someone attracts should be taken into account. There is a reason the KKK types love Trump and it's because he purposely speaks in certain code words that they recognize and take to mean he's one of them. Whether he really believes it or is doing it for the votes I guess is up for debate. There is no denying there hasn't been a candidate since George Wallace that racists around the country have been this excited about.

I suggest you go on facebook and read the comments on any political article posted by NPR. And see how closely the most popular posts adhere with any concept of liberty.

Which websites are promoting the idea that Trump is supported by "white nationalists"?

Which websites are promoting the candidacy of Evan McMullin?

Hint: the same ones, all left-leaning

Do any of these sites bring up issues or problematic support for Clinton? No they do not.

I think I can guess. Overall, I think Trump is about as anti-liberty as they come...worse than Hillary. Johnson has some weaknesses in certain areas, but he's the most pro-liberty candidate in the field and I want the LP to gain more influence in the national debate. So I voted for him to help the LP hit some vote thresholds that allow certain privileges to kick in that the Dems and GOP can take for granted. Unfortunately, current election laws purposely try to stack the deck against third parties. Seriously, what would it have really hurt to have a couple more people on the debate stage than Hillary and Trump?

I would have liked to see Johnson in the debates. However, I fear Johnson would be exposed as having little depth or understanding of significant issues, other than general philosophies and beliefs. Which displays what I believe to be a certain intellectual laziness.

I agree. I have been disappointed with him in this campaign. He actually ran a very good campaign in 2012, but not as many were paying attention that time. I thought he was better prepared last time. For me, it's not about him though. He isn't going to win anyway, so that's moot. For me it's about the country needing to have libertarian voices given more of a chance to be in the national discussion. And giving a vote to his party is a chance to hit certain legal thresholds that make it easier for the LP to compete on the same playing field.