You are going to hate me for saying this

[canetoad]

We watch the indictments pile on. Each one more scandalous than the last; each one more of an offence against decency and the rule of law. And at no point has the American political system provided and unequivocal refutation of candidate Trump.

I see respected commentators seriously discuss the possibility of Trump winning the 2024 election. I can't decide if this is media hype and spin in the pursuit of ratings and dollars or not. It should stop.

You are a relatively young country, legistlation-wise. And it shows. You have no mechanism for dealing with this man. Can you believe it? One man, one criminal, has brought a nation to it's knees with fear.

Australia is around the same age as America but we called upon an older, tested system on which to base our laws. Your founding fathers were such idealists that a man such as Trump becoming presidents firstly, never occured to them, secondly, dislodging him from a permanent position of power was not even imagined.

So what do you do about this man? He should not be spoken about as a viable presidential candidate. The media are encouraging the madness by treating him as such.

What are you going to do about him?

PS I love you, DU and hope you find a solution to this dilemma, because your lives are at stake.

[Solly Mack]

1. It does boggle the mind.

That people are seriously contemplating/debating returning to office, and not just any office either but the presidency, a person that tried to overthrow the government.

This shouldn't be an issue because it shouldn't even be a consideration.

[captain queeg]

2. Good points. And I think you hit the nail when you mentionedmedia hype and dollars

That’s how we got him in the first place and the media loves the emotional response he illicits. They would sell all our souls for ratings and bucks. You could let him have freedom of speech and just ignore him but that’s not happening.

[wnylib]

52. The Murdoch media hype came from Australia.

But, yes, it is a problem.

[brush]

3. You are so right. I get angry when commentators say he might...

win the WH again. It raises my hackles but I believe we will defeat trump as there are more decent voters than trump and his cult. We outnumbered them in 2020 and will do it again.

There is a provision in the 14th Amendment that prohibits anyone who participated in an insurrection against the government from ever holding office again. It it being talked up by two prominent Republicans no less. At least some of them are starting to get worried about the orange turd and the threat he represents to the nation.

[MOMFUDSKI]

37. Media should be showing the

convo between Luttig and Tribe twice an hour until Secretary’s of State start refusing him a spot on the primary ballots. Media has that power. $$$ may stop them.

[2naSalit]

46. +1

[brush]

55. Agreed. I'm for that. The media should stop hyping the trump v Biden horse race game...

and do fulfill their responsibility to the nation and democracy.

[B.See]

4. They call it PRIVILEGE.

And (unfortunately), here in America, some people have it, and some people DON'T.

[Hekate]

5. Canetoad, I'm not going to "hate you" for saying anything. But I do have to read this tomorrow...

…in order to consider your points.

My disappointment in my country runs deep at this pointi. Speaking of origins, back when Trump was getting started in the White House the media kept wittering on about how he was “breaking norms” and it kept driving me bonkers until I finally said to hubby, “What are these norms of which they speak? A gentleman’s agreement from 1775? Did they all just shake hands on this on the assumption that we never would actually have a man in the office who had no sense of shame whatsoever to stop him?”

Sure looks like it.

Tomorrow, my friend. Today I’ve had earthquakes and a tropical storm, and somehow that’s it for the night. You take care of yourself.

[canetoad]

29. Sister, I hope you are safe

I've been tracking the storm and watched it lessen in magnitude. Please stay in touch if you can.

It's the norms and institutions that keep us all civilized. Break too many and wham! Civilized no more. Until tomorrow my friend.....

[claudette]

6. I agree

America should hang its head in shame to allow such a degenerate criminal to run for president. Why can’t something be done? It shouldn’t be up to the American media which reports every single disgusting word of this criminal to decide.

[Hamlette]

7. I wish I could say he is not a viable candidate but he won in 2016. I still have PTSD about that.

he is a viable candidate. Under our system.

[Grasswire2]

58. He didn't actually "win" (more votes) in 2016.

How many more votes did HRC get?

It's only our "electoral college" giving primacy to rural states that put him in the WH, and he even cheated at that, collaborating with Russian help.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

63. And thats why the electoral college

Was a bullshit compromise and should be taken out of the constitution,the south is.populated enough to render it obsolete.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

8. The media is only telling the truth.

He could get elected. It's as simple as that. They don't pick the candidates, the people do. Put the blame where it belongs, with the American people, or at least one party.

It's lazy thinking to blame the media for everything. There are plenty of people in the media blowing the whistle. We probably wouldn't even know about the fake electors scheme if it wasn't for Rachel Maddow.

[canetoad]

11. No, is not lazy thinking

To blame the media. I didn't say 'for everything'. Your words not mine.

What do you even mean by 'lazy thinking'?

[Joinfortmill]

13. 👍

[Grumpy Old Guy]

16. Facts are facts.

"I see respected commentators seriously discuss the possibility of Trump winning the 2024 election. I can't decide if this is media hype and spin in the pursuit of ratings and dollars or not. It should stop."

Like it or not, this is a fact. How can they not report it? Facts matter.

[canetoad]

18. The only true fact

Is that they are reporting this opinion.

You're fiddling while rome burns.

[inthewind21]

50. Oh but

It's not an "opinion" it's a fact. Or have you forgot 2016?

[I_UndergroundPanther]

64. Its trump 24 hours

Even on msnbc. Hardly ever in comparison with republican topics do I hear any topics relating to democrats.
Its all what do republicans think,feel or do.

Yeah have some about trump mostly about his crimes.and the shitty things republicans are doing to this country.

That is what kind of republican topics msnbc should be airing.

Owned media isnt a free media.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. Perhaps it was your "It should stop" remark

It seems strange to say that, with polls showing Trump not that far behind in a matchup with Pres. Biden, you think they should stop saying it's possible that Trump could win.

Are you saying it's their duty to lie about the polls, or just that it's better if they ignore them?

[Grumpy Old Guy]

21. +1

[canetoad]

30. I'm not saying that

But am aware of the selling value of close polls.

Personally, I couldn't give a rat's arse about polls. IMO they are nearly all skewed to give the result that a particular cohort desires. Unfortunately, polling is a big business. Dunno why - it's like reading tarot cards.

[muriel_volestrangler]

32. So what are you saying "should stop"?

The thing about polls is that there is nothing that comes remotely close to them, for accurately and regularly reporting the opinions, feelings and intentions of large numbers of people. A full census costs a hell of a lot, cannot ask detailed questions, and can only realistically be done every few years. Elections put many subjects into one decision - "who do you want to represent you for X years?" (would you rather we elect representatives far more regularly, eg every 6 months, so that we get a better idea of what people really want?) You could use referenda on loads of subjects; it seems to me that only Switzerland makes an effort in that direction.

Are you saying you'd like election results to be a surprise? I think that, if everyone ignored polls, then we'd be far less better informed. We'd think that people generally think like we do, reading, watching and listening to the same things. And the less scrupulous sections of the media would have even more influence over their consumers. If taking polls is like reading tarot cards, then not taking them is like following a cult.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

20. Lazy thinking.

"So what do you do about this man? He should not be spoken about as a viable presidential candidate. The media are encouraging the madness by treating him as such"

What makes you think it's as simple as that? If the media could simply make him go away by not talking about him, it would have happened a long time ago.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

24. More lazy thinking

"Trump becoming presidents firstly, never occured to them, secondly, dislodging him from a permanent position of power was not even imagined"

It did occur to them, and dislodging him from power was indeed imagined. He was impeached twice. He was saved by members of a corrupt political party. The media covered the impeachment gavel to gavel

[betsuni]

9. Well, "older, tested system" is called corrupt status quo establishment by populists and disruptors.

Luckily they're getting less and less attention because obviously all government isn't corrupt and bribed, that's stupid, it's Republicans.

[J_William_Ryan]

10. The problem is

Congress’ failure to enact legislation to create the legal mechanism as authorized by Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to disqualify candidates from Federal office pursuant to Section 3 of the Amendment.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

56. +1

[Joinfortmill]

12. Amen. Corporate news sucks, really, really sucks.

[Duncanpup]

14. Canetoad

91 indictments and he’s not even under house arrest.

[canetoad]

15. Right on brother

And also leading the republican field for 24. This is not democracy it's bullying. America is an abused spouse.

[Duncanpup]

23. Hey how's our friend panadera

[canetoad]

25. I msg'd him coupla weeks ago

And he was fine. Had a couple of health probs but getting over them. I love him, Duncanpup, he's one of the most beautiful humans I've ever known.

[Duncanpup]

26. I agree friend

[DFW]

19. He is purely the product of our media. So what do we do about "media encouraging the madness?"

The spirit of our first amendment says that we are to do nothing at all, but those who wrote our first amendment never envisioned one political party possessing part of the media as their propaganda arm, either.

When the Soviet Union was formed, their main daily newspaper, which was cynically called "[The] Truth," stated on every page one "Organ of [the] Central Committee of [the] Communist Party of the USSR." That part, at least, was true. It's exactly what they were.

**Slavic languages like Russian and Ukrainian don't have articles, so правда translates as "a truth," "the truth," or just "truth," depending on context and the language it is being translated into. This is also why an argument over "Ukraine" vs. "The Ukraine" is ridiculous, since they are both perfectly correct English translations of the original "Україна."

When the National Socialists took over Germany in 1933 (and then Austria in 1938), they even established a government Propaganda Ministry--sort of "Fox News as a Cabinet Position."

In Lenin's Soviet Union, as well as Hitler's/Göbbels' Third Reich, if the regime wanted you to "know" something, you knew it. If there was something they didn't want you to know, you either didn't know it, or risked your life finding out. My wife's grandfather, the one who had a radio, used to listen to the British radio during World War II, though the penalty for doing so, if caught, was death.

So, it's not "what are we going to do about Trump?" It's more like "What are you going to do about the media that created him, and what are we going to do about those who believe them?"

Prohibit all advertising for Coca-Cola, and all TV and film sequences showing people drinking it, and I promise you, drinking Coca-Cola will diminish by 90%. But we are for a free market, so we don't want to prohibit that, no matter HOW much damage it does to our organs or our teeth. We are also for free speech and a free press, so how do we prohibit a media that is paid to openly advocate candidates who would abolish the very freedom of speech and the press that made them in the first place?

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. "never envisioned one political party possessing part of the media as their propaganda arm"

Is that really a decent take on history? I googled '"john adams" "newspapers" | "journalists"', and the first result was:

The Age-Old Problem of “Fake News”

It’s been part of the conversation as far back as the birth of the free press

In the margins of his copy of Condorcet’s treatise Outlines of an Historical View of the Progress of the Human Mind, President John Adams scribbled a cutting note.

Writing in the section where the French philosopher predicted that a free press would advance knowledge and create a more informed public, Adams scoffed. “There has been more new error propagated by the press in the last ten years than in an hundred years before 1798,” he wrote at the time.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/age-old-problem-fake-news-180968945/

Third result:

After U.S. independence, Adams returned to his role as a diplomat at the Court of St. James’s in London, from 1785 to 1788, before being elected vice president in 1788 and president in 1796.

His presidency (1797–1801) was a tragic episode. As a leader among the Federalists, Adams became the subject of scurrilous attacks in Republican newspapers and pamphlets, which portrayed him as a monarchist and an enemy of republican government. They also ridiculed him as being effeminate or a hermaphrodite because of his height and high-pitched voice.

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1156/john-adams

[DFW]

41. Literacy in the year 1800 as opposed to now

It was the exception, not the rule, and the concept of an all-pervasive electronic media wasn’t even science fiction yet. If Fox Noise had been around in the mid 1760s, as well as the capacity of every inhabitant of eastern North America to hear it 24/7 to the exclusion of any competition, the “War of Rebellion” would have happened either much sooner or nor at all, depending on the allegiance of the media owners. To 90% of both colonists and native Americans, George III would have been either saint or Satan, and within weeks, not years, depending on the preference of the Murdoch of the era. Instead, the debate developed much more slowly, and even in 1776, an armed insurrection with independence as its goal was hardly supported by a vast majority of the Colonies’ inhabitants.

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. Among those allowed to vote, no, the majority could read

Historical records are incomplete so the information that has been studied on literacy in our country's past is estimated, but educational historians assert that New England in the late 18th century had the highest literacy rate in the world at the time, nearly 100% in Boston. Literacy was higher in New England and the mid-Atlantic colonies than in the South. Literacy was also higher in cities than in more rural areas. In New England the literacy rate was 60% between 1650-1670, 85% between 1758- 1762, and 90% between 1787 - 1795. In Virginia it was between 54% & 60% in the late 18th century. Literacy in early New York and Pennsylvania was high, owing much to their Dutch and German immigrants. While the average literacy rate was about 70% it was higher than in England, although when taking into account the illiteracy among Indians and African Americans this would place literacy for the total population slightly lower than in England. Immigrants to the American colonies were also more literate than the general population of the countries they left, although Scotland and Wales also had high literacy levels. There were varying levels of literacy among New England women in the eighteenth century - between 45% - 67% during 1731-1800, though some estimates found female literacy to be 90% by the Revolutionary period.

https://colonialquills.blogspot.com/2011/06/literacy-in-colonial-america.html

Maybe the states further south than Virginia were below 50%, but not enough to make the overall figure below 50%, given that Virginia and the New England states had the larger populations.

An estimated 20% of colonists owned a copy of "Common Sense": https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/thomas-paine-the-original-publishing-viral-superstar-2

[malaise]

35. More than a few of the media billionaire owners

Would welcome fascism in a heartbeat.
That is all.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

65. Bring back the fairness act

And require news to present both sides.

Thats how it was before reagan killed it.

[jaxexpat]

22. We got our reasons, some of which are suspiciously cabalish:

1. 2 party political system (tit-for-tat transactional comprehension and acceptance of an evolutionary dead end and self-polarizing product of bureaucratic tyranny due to a national phobia of intellectualism and a universal belief in the "wisdom" of the marketplace)
2. Winner-take-all elections
3. No constitutionally mandated term limits for legislators or judges
4. Electoral college
5. Multi-generational and psychotic denial that black, plantation-based slavery ever happened
6. Oh...and the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". We had to pick one and the British had already picked the other option. Literally, a no-brainer.

[avebury]

27. It could also be about trying to eliminate Trump

from the race in order to get another vile Republican in the White House and thus continue their march towards destroying the country to maintain permanent control.

[malaise]

31. Precisely

Great OP

[MistakenLamb]

33. We wouldn't have had to worry about this first more serious test

If that bastard Ford had not pardoned Nixon. The future is unclear now, I hope Biden wins, and I hope its done without any domestic terror acts done. But who knows how voters feel in 13 months? I am more worried about our side pulling a 2016 and not showing up again. MAGA will be there in force next year. This, in their minds, is the white christians last stand. I feel a dark shadow on the future though, I don't see their side backing down peacefully. They are opening embracing fascistic and genocidal positions gleefully. I've been figuring out escape plans for my friends and family in Florida I feel that bleak about the non immediate future.

[Trueblue Texan]

34. I don't hate you...I agree with you.

Sometimes I think of our young democracy as an adolescent, overly confident in a world it hasn't yet had an opportunity to experience; so sure we know what is best for everyone else; so frustrated when we cannot have our way. But the wisdom of our founding fathers was in their foresight and the flexibility built into our system. We will address Trump's crimes and those who'd like to follow in his footsteps. We will write laws to prevent the destruction he has wrought for future wannabe tyrants.

We focus so much on the media treating Trump as a credible candidate. Let me remind the reader, no one took Trump's candidacy seriously in 2016. We were all so shocked when he was declared the president-elect. What a tragic day that was! But still, we held on and used the tools of democracy to hold him and his co-conspirators accountable.

I think it is important this time around that we make our voices heard in the media that while Trump may well be a candidate, he is representing the most extreme of extreme Americans--as is Desantis. In fact, the entire Republican Party represents the extreme of the extreme. WE, as citizens of this nation should be calling out our lawmakers for treating the right's extremism as normal. WE, as consumers of media should be calling out the media for treating candidates on the right as mainstream when they are as extreme as they have ever been. Members of rightwing media characterize the Left as radical extremist for normal behaviors such as taking care of our children and refusing to tolerate bigotry and hatred in our schools.

I can't speak for everyone but I know my legislators completely ignore any communications I have with them. They do not care about my opinion and they make it known. (Just STFU and keep paying my salary, lady.) The media on the other hand, may have more interest in our opinions. I think we should be shouting them from the rooftops and make the story about NORMAL Americans instead of the extreme right. Of course this requires that we get out of our own media bubbles and consume media that can be somewhat sickening. I'm not talking about Fox News or OAN, though they both can gag a maggot. I'm talking about local news--they are more likely to listen. I don't know if it will make a big difference, but all politics is local and it might have more impact than we imagine. At least local media will begin to get the idea that there are more of us than they thought.

[ecstatic]

36. Good points, they were largely ignoring him until the indictments

Or maybe my memory is fucking with me. He should have been treated with the scorn and disdain that comes with all of the crimes he has committed. Instead he's been welcomed as the legitimate FrontRunner for months now.

[Kaleva]

38. I'm more focused on surviving catastrophic climate change

The Defendant is a bump in the road compared to that.

[tanyev]

39. Dislodging a president was imagined.

What was never imagined was that a significant percentage of the House and Senate would be complicit.


Oh, and the Supreme Court.

[brooklynite]

40. "He should not be spoken about as a viable presidential candidate"

But he is one.

Acting like an ostrich and sticking your head in the sand won't make the potential of his election any less likely. I like to accept facts, the better to rationally plan to address them.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

57. +1

[Grumpy Old Guy]

59. +1

[Johnny2X2X]

42. Our system has holes

The founding fathers never invisioned someone like Trump, but they also didn't forsee corrupt Senators and Supreme Court Justices. Senators were supposed to be noble and beyond reproach. Senators were given more power and longer terms because their loyalty to the constitution was supposed to be absolute. And Supreme Court Justices were supposed to be humble servants who were given so much power because they were viewed as being almost monk like in their devotion.

The system is full of holes for corrupt people like Trump, Moscow Mitch, and Clarence Thomas to walk through and exploit, and they are finding new holes every day seemingly.

[brer cat]

43. K&R

[dalton99a]

44. Kick

[Sympthsical]

45. Our Founders very much envisaged a Trump

They knew that any democracy could run the risk of a demagogue ascending to power, and they discussed the possibility a great deal while slapping together the Constitution. They very much studied Greek and Roman history, and when piecing together the executive branch, questions surrounding if their system could produce a Caesar was very much in their minds. Even later, during the Civil War, Lincoln basically shredded the Constitution in the moment. His thinking was very much, "Look, we're doing this now to save the Union, but what would stop a Napoleon from taking advantage?" It bugged him that someone who did not have his gentler aims might do what he was doing during a civil emergency.

So they put some protections in. But they're getting screwed up.

The Electoral College. The whole point of the institution was that it would be the brakes on popular stupidity. I know the base understanding is, "It's there to protect rich white men!" Yeah, kinda. But it was really because the Founders knew popular will could be easily persuaded or manipulated, so they wanted a backstop against some asshole coming in appealing to the lowest common denominator. Now, the EC is ironclad partisan. Our parties make very damn sure that only the truest of true believers get those positions. So now, instead of being a protection, the Electoral College can very easily become an accomplice.

The Founders just did not intend for the kind of two-party, everything's partisan and manipulated, let's calcify factions into every institution fuckery that we've managed. Washington said what he said in his Farewell. Let me summarize for those unfamiliar. "Knock it off with the political party partisanship bullshit, you dumbasses." Yeah, we don't listen.

The second protection was Congress. Checks and balances in the branches. But what happens when one branch of government just goes completely haywire? Congress just doesn't do anything anymore. They're all so worried about being re-elected all the time that they have off-loaded as much responsibility and power as humanly possible to the courts and the executive so they can never be blamed for anything. The Founders never envisioned that an entire branch of government would decide they didn't really like power or responsibility, and they would start throwing it away so no one could blame them come election time. That concept is something that wouldn't compute in their minds, because they never thought anyone could be that obsequious towards special interests and party politics. Who surrenders their own power?!

Mix in partisanship where one party will never devour one of their own, it doesn't function. There is no march of Goldwater and Rhodes to Nixon happening in the current climate. If Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell walked up to a camera tomorrow and said, "He cannot run. We do not support this. We will have nothing to do with it," it would be over. Their careers would be over, sure, but that would do enough to put Trump off.

The third protection is the courts. Can Trump even run for office? I read that Atlantic article by Laurence Tribe arguing Trump is ineligible. And throughout, my question was, "If that is valid, who's going to enforce that?" Who sues? Would the Supreme Court take it? How would they rule? It is not as given as people seem to think. After all, Trump lost pretty much every election challenge that went before them.

I don't see Trump winning, fortunately. I did not feel that way at all in 2016, but I think his political force is largely spent at this point. It's just going to be a messy wrapping up process.

But once he's gone, this country really needs to have a discussion. And it's not one the politicians will have, because they like their power and institutions as it is. The system is good for them.

It's just that the system isn't good for us, and people need to start snapping out of it and stop defending it.

[jimlup]

48. My worry is that the Republi-fools will start to realize that he is NOT viable...

There is starting to be some recognition of the fact that this guy is a NOT viable even from the Repuli-fools. This would be more of a problem than if he is the Republican nominee. They may come to their senses over the course of the next 12 months....

Then we will actually have a harder fight to keep Joe in office.

[Arthur_Frain]

49. That's pretty specific.

England had a hell of a time with their trump clone, so I’m not sure I credit your point about your systems capability to deal with it any better than ours.

Not sure I have a cogent response for you, as there is so much that I don’t understand these days.

Such as how does trade continue with a nation like Russia presently? Are we still pretending that we can assign rules to war, and thereby just go on as usual? Globalism sure is great, ain’t it?

Social medias cancerous rise to pre-eminence as a “news” distribution source is more to blame than our constitution for what’s going on now. I know folks in my area who only get their news from their social media feeds.

And actually, our constitution provides for this, unfortunately the entire Republican Party caved wholesale when asked to do their jobs, and keep him in check. There have been several missed opportunities along the way to rein him in. All mostly ignored because of partisanship.

We live in strange times, when one orange clown can convince half the nation that their greatest threat is another American. The rough beast slouching towards Bethlehem has much to do with ignorance, so it seems.

[Brainfodder]

51. Ratings.

They afraid of dull news ratings.

Rupert, please die already!

[inthewind21]

53. No need for them to be

afraid of "dull ratings". The get plenty of viewers. Many of them tight here on this site who on a daily basis post/complain about the media. Ironic huh.

[Wingus Dingus]

54. I'm hoping for true patriots to rise up and prevent him

from being on state ballots due to the 14th amendment. If that doesn't happen, I'm praying for patriotic cheeseburgers and Popeye's chicken sandwiches to rise up and clog his pipes. I'd be happy either way. I don't think we'll survive him again.

[D23MIURG23]

60. We have mechanisms, but they are for Trump, not the entire GOP.

We had a civil war, so it's not unprecedented to have major social collapse and dysfunction.

The 14th amendment is a civil war protection to keep rebels out of the government. We also have the 25th amendment for if the president is disabled or incapacitated. We also have impeachment which can remove a president for "high crimes and misdemeanors".

The reason that none of these have been effective so far, is that they address an unfit president, and not an unfit political party constituting half of an effective duopoly. Trump could have been convicted in his second impeachment trial after Jan. 6 if the GOP were willing to accept a temporary setback and prioritize the future of the country (and even their own political party). But they weren't and aren't.

All of our mechanisms for dealing with an unfit president require cooperation across the political spectrum, by necessity. They would be too easy to weaponize without requiring some level of consensus.

The problem here isn't Trump - he's a symptom. The problem the US is having is that Trump accelerated the direction of a party that was already going rogue. Now we have a section of the electorate composed of right wing conspiracists who want to use Trump as a weapon against the federal government, and a party of crooks willing to go along with that for their own self interest.

The only solution we have is to use the criminal justice system in cases where it can be used, and to electorally marginalize the GOP until they are able to find a way forward that isn't a menace to our system in general. This isn't merely about Trump, it's a cold civil war.

[liberalmediaaddict]

61. Tired of Democrats getting blamed for Trump

People act like it's our responsibility to stop Trump. We've tried relentlessly for 8 years to rid America of him and his MAGA movement. Voting against him in every election, impeaching him, investigating him, etc...

The burden is on the Republican party to end Trump's reign of terror: stop nominating him, stop donating to him, stop apologizing for him, stop working for him...

Democrats and the majority of Americans who want to Trump to go away can't force Republican voters to see the light and get behind somebody else.

But if they do actually nominate this corrupt sociopath for President again we'll turn out like never before to vote against him and ensure Joe Biden gets reelected.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

62. Conservatives own the media

Owned speech is not free speech.