Yeah, I am hoping you know that Snopes has been proven to have errors in it.
Classic.
You asked for a reference to Breitbart peddling blatant lies. I gave you a whole detailed list with links to sources, and rather than recognize a single one of them you immediately question the veracity of the criticisms while staunchly defending Breitbart from any wrongdoing. You are the blindest sort of blind.
What evidence would it take to convince you that Snoes, a site dedicated to debunking internet lies, is more truthful than Breitbart, a site dedicated to made-up news stories? I think there is absolutely nothing that could convince you of this.
Sol, any chance you will spell out how you determined that third party voters would have voted for Hillary and not Trump?
I didn't determine anything of the sort. How did you determine they wouldn't?
But if we were to assume that the breakdown of third party voters was roughly the same as the rest of the electorate (about 50-50 but slightly in Hillary's favor), then you can reasonably assume that any state that was decided by a margin smaller than half of the percentage that voted third party was swayed by third party voters.
Example: If Trump got 100k votes and Clinton got 99k votes and Johnson got 4k votes, then there were theoretically 2k people who would have preferred Clinton in a two way race, but voted for Johnson instead. Those people could have given Clinton the state, had they not voted for Johnson. They elected their least-favorite candidate by voting for their favorite candidate over their second favorite candidate.