454
CONFIRMED: Elon Musk Plans to Spend at Least $100 Million to Help Republicans in the Midterms (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
95 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 85 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Would someone please arrest and charge this motherfucker?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 58 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Citizens United strikes again!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It's so blatantly bullshit that it even makes Wikipedia sound stupid:

    The Supreme Court's ruling in favor of Citizens United sparked significant controversy, with some viewing it as a defense of American principles of free speech and a safeguard against government overreach, and others criticizing it for reaffirming the longstanding principle of corporate personhood,and for allowing large corporations to wield disproportionate political power by allowing them to spend unlimited amounts of money to support their chosen political candidates, provided the corporations were technically independent of the campaigns.

    Ah yes, what a great "safeguard against government overreach," to give corporations unlimited power. You can't overreach if you don't really exist!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 45 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Wasn't this the same guy who said he was going to take a step back from politics to focus on running his businesses like he was supposed to?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago*

    I've worked with/for assholes like this before. The same types who whine about people being "political" if it goes even slightly against some conservative thing. They view it as being "neutral" to just uphold conservative things - it's only "political" if it even has a whiff of not being pro-Republican/conservative...

    I've even heard managers that have policed conversations at work as being "too political" later saying they were going to vote for Trump because he's "pro-business" or whatever the fuck. Yeah, like saying you are going to vote Republican is not political, JFC.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 33 points 3 months ago

    The lame pedo supporting the pedoparty? Say it ain't so

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 26 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Birds of a feather… etc. More so with Republicans.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Musk is in with the Republicans at this point because he has done a lot of bad shit and knows that he may get investigated if they lose the election.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    And I misremembering because I believe he's come out and said as much before.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
    • [–] 22 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    So 0.01% of his wealth? What commitment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    Lol I know thats off the cuff, but it's significantly less than even that.

    It's .001, even the difference in your mistake is a significant amount to everyone else. That's 100 dollars vs 1 dollar. And that's just the math error.

    In this case it's a FUCKING TRILLION DOLLARS VS 100 MILLION DOLLARS.

    No one in the history of fucking anyone should ever have anything close to either amount. But it's key to understand that those amounts differ by 999,899,999,999 dollars.

    I've never seen a billionaire bleed, but I'd fucking love to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    0.01% is 1% of 1%. 1% of a trillion is 10 billion, 1% of 10 billion is 100 million. The original was actually correct

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 16 points 3 months ago

    If El-Sayed wins the Michigan primary, they're gonna pour so much money into the general that Michigan will become like the 3rd largest economy in the world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 15 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    Why did america not arrest him the first time he did this?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I mean, he's allowed to spend money. The illegal part was offering money to vote Republican.

    As to why no arrest, because this county's a sham. These midterms are so incredibly important, and it's kinda like, will they be tampered with, will they not be, wait and see! America loves drama and reality TV, and now we're all on the show.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    If these elections are so important why haven’t people formed militias as a backup plan for if any fuckery happening?

    Do we care about elections, if we’re not willing to do anything about them cheating brazenly in them?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Because the people buying guns and forming militias are the one's in masks abducting citizens for not looking white enough

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    You know the rights to buy guns and form militias is something everyone has the right to do. People need to stop waiting for someone else to save them and start working to protect themselves and communities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    I mean, you raise a point, but good luck doing anything and trying to stay off the radar of national security. They've got 25 years of experience spying on American citizens under the guise of stopping terrorism. If I go out and try to form a militia right now, I'm not voting in the next election.

    I think familiarizing ourselves with decentralized methods of communication is an important step to take right now. Hopefully not necessary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I'm well aware, also painfully aware that anyone doing so without the state doing their best to either label them as domestic terrorists or insert their own agent provocateurs to cause the kind of incident that would make the public label them as such, don't currently exist, thanks to the panopticon making it the easiest thing ever for the powers that be to dismantle their entire organisation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    That's because he doesn't want to go to prison.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    No, I don't think so at all, but depending on whether the Democrats field a reasonably progressive candidate, there’s at least a slim chance. If not, and it comes down to the usual corporate Democrats—who, contrary to the will of the voters, clearly call the shots at the DNC—there’s no chance from the get-go.

    For the Conservatives, however, this chance does not even exist in the first place.

    So the Democrats are still the lesser evil, because the conservatives are not only many times more corrupt, they’re also completely unscrupulous in their inhumane actions.

    With a Democratic president, at least, it would still be possible to engage in dialogue on the international stage. A conservative, on the other hand, represents exclusively the interests of organized crime, as the current regime demonstrates day in and day out: It commits horrific war crimes, does nothing but enrich itself and its billionaire financiers, openly threatens even the U.S.’s former allies with armed force, and is doing everything in its power to replace international law with the law of the jungle.

    These people are the scum of humanity. The conformist, greedy opportunists among the Democrats are certainly despicable as well, but even they are no match for the absolute monsters currently ruling the country.

    Look up the term "Dark Enlightenment" —this far-right, inhuman "theory" is the foundation of what conservatives stand for and what they are working exclusively to bring about, since it benefits the billionaires and would give them absolute power without any restrictions. Should they continue to succeed in this, it would have enormous, negative consequences for other, still somewhat functioning democracies around the world.

    In short: A democratic president would definitely be the lesser evil—for the world as well as for the U.S. Anything that weakens the current regime is absolutely desirable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 12 points 3 months ago

    I would say let him waste his money but Americans are fucking stupid and they watch political ads and say "oh I'll vote for that guy cuz I saw him on TV".

    We deserve all that we get. Now they're going to have drones that hunt you down if you speak out against the fascists. Don't believe me? Look up Israeli death calls in Lebanon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 12 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    He's goin to jail if they dont win lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 29 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Hey sitouts, this is what happens when you sit on your ass.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago* (10 children)

    I actively called my retirement plan manager and spent several hours on the phone, just trying to make sure they didn't spend a bunch of my money on the space X IPO. They did, and I lost about 4000 dollars in one day.

    If I pull it out, I lose 30% instantly. Not to mention it's retirement value goes away entirely. Switching to another manager is pointless because they did exactly the same thing.

    That was MY money, that I OWN. If I have absolutely no say in how that's being spent, how in the holy name of fuck do you expect us to influence elected representatives, that are being bought and paid for with those dollars by someone else?

    The game is over, they've won. It's time for crime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago*

    I have some basic understanding of finance (and I mean basic), so take this as an observation rather than investment advice. If your retirement plan allows you to change your asset allocation, and you have a high-conviction thesis that a significant market event is about to occur, it may be worth temporarily rotating from a growth-oriented allocation into a more conservative allocation to reduce downside exposure.

    Under normal circumstances, attempting to time the market is a bad idea, and financial advisors or plan managers will usually push you away from doing so. However, there are rare situations where it's clear as crystal what's happening. In those cases, reducing equity exposure and increasing allocations to lower-volatility assets for a short period may be a reasonable risk-management decision.

    Using the recent SpaceX-related market activity as an example, I find it difficult to believe that any fund with a genuinely conservative mandate would have maintained meaningful exposure to assets directly affected by that event. A conservative portfolio, by definition, should prioritize capital preservation over aggressive growth and generally avoid concentrated exposure to higher-risk investments.

    You generally can't tell them, "I don't want this stock," when dealing with index funds, but you can get yourself out of the fund entirely while it's poisoned. Unfortunately, my company was changing providers right when the SpaceX shit was happening, and I couldn't make the change myself.

    I haven't been keeping up with the bond market but last I heard it was it's own shit show so I'm not really sure anything is 'safe' these days.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (8 children)

    Retirement accounts are a scam. It’s important for people to learn this, and stop contributing to them. It’s not a “benefit” to give all your money to corrupt Wall Street shit heads…

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    A tax-advantaged account that (typically) grows faster than inflation and includes additional compensation that my employer would not otherwise give me is a scam? So where should I be putting my money instead?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    It grows faster until they use it as a bailout for rich fucks. You should make your own investments; it’s your money and you should have full control of it. Any system that doesn’t allow that is wall steet holding your money hostage, and a scam.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I opened this expecting to ask where to put the money instead, fully expecting to be told to buy gold.

    I'm glad to see that conversation has already happened.

    There are far better commodities to invest in. Gold is probably one of the worst. But good luck with that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    Not entirely a scam in theory. Though we are currently in a period of unprecedented corruption that is so complicated and complete that it might as well be. Even 5 years ago, I would have attributed certain actions to protect the market as an attempt to protect everyone. The systems in place are such that if a stock company fails, it creates far-reaching market upsets across industries worldwide. Essentially, if something fails, it takes everyone down with them.

    The fix would be the state taking control of those industries to allow them to stabilize. Unfortunately, most state actors are also tied economically to those systems. That is, they're corrupt as fuck and don't care about people, but their own money and status.

    So retirement funds and entitlements weren't entirely a scam, but they are mostly so now. I doubt I will see a dime of mine if I don't use it soon for school, expating, or buying a house. I certainly won't see it when I retire.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    "The Democrats left me!!111"

    --Musk

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Didn't Musk start his own party last year or so? I remember sth about a party called the 'American Party'.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Of course he does. He's a billionaire pedophile and a corporate vulture, and that's exactly who the Republican Party serves.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Pedophile? Sources?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Did you see that he's fighting the new law in Wisconsin that makes it illegal for AI create nudes of children? And everyone else, of course, but as far as I can tell, there wasn't even a hint of "Oh, yeah, that ability probably isn't a good thing" from Musk. Nope, just wants the law removed.

    Walz called him a creep.

    Republicans, of course, are suddenly very quiet about "states rights", something they usually claim to vigorously support. Instead, they want Trump to issue an order preventing such state-level laws against AI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    And it'll work too. Money talks in the old usa and people are being squeezed so hard right now you can buy their loyalty for very little. A perfect storm. I remember hearing as a kid that you don't have to be rich to be the president but no one ever added, but you need rich people to become president.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    It didn't work in Wisconsin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Money helps, but it doesn't GUARANTEE an election.

    That's going to be MAGAs problem - they think they can win with money alone, flooding the airwaves and mailboxes with crude propaganda, rather than ideas. Nothing from the insane amount of past propaganda has come true, and things have only gotten much, much worse, and EVERYONE sees it, and EVERYONE is unhappy about it.

    MAGAs have made the fatal mistake of believing their own propaganda, getting high on their own supply, so their ads disparaging Socialism are actually going to work against them, and be some of the DemSocs best promotion - "You don't want any of that FREE Socialist healthcare do you?"

    And voters are going to to think, "Well, I can't afford the expensive MAGA health care, so I'll give it a try."

    Always remember: MAGA talks a good game, but they are ALWAYS bluffing. Every one of them are virtuosically incompetent, and fuck up literally EVERYTHING they do, and they will fuck up this election, too. The Dems just have to be ready to take full advantage of every inevitable MAGA mistake that is surely coming.

    These people are STUPID beyond words. Exploit that RUTHLESSLY and MERCILESSLY.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    It will only work if the Democrats put up a bad candidate. A good candidate with good policies can defeat billionaire money, like in NY or WI, but a bad candidate with bad policies, like Kamala Harris, can easily waste a billion dollars.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Well someone is gonna have to because Trump isn't giving any of the other ones any money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    It's amazing how much this guy wants a revolution. You can't keep taking power away from the people without repercussion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Can't wait to see all the new accounts telling people to migrate to lemmy and block anyone that you disagree with

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Please throw 200 million behind Stevens!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] -1 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    Kamala Harris spent 1 billion and still lost.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    It's because MAGA cheated, and we ALL know it. We just don't know how, because the MAGA comedy act of Schmuck & Schumer immediately declared the election "Fair & Square," despite it being obvious bullshit, and shut down any discussion of an investigation of the integrity of that election - leaving Trump/Musk/Putin (and now probably Israel), to be able to do it all again in 2028.

    When he wins a third term in 2028 by sweeping all 7 swing states again, and wins the popular vote with a 25% approval rating, maybe people will start to figure out that Schmuck & Jeffries work for MAGA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    It’s because MAGA cheated, and we ALL know it

    Where did I hear that one before... Ah yes, The Trump losing against Biden back in 2021. Proof or GTFO

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Just because MAGAs had an illegitimate complaint about election integrity in 2020, doesn't mean the Democrats don't have a legitimate complaint about election integrity in 2024. That's just stupid logic.

    Proof, or GTFO? How about this: Let's have a comprehensive investigation of the 2016, 2020, and the 2024 elections, and we'll see what it turns up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    and we’ll see what it turns up.

    So no proof at all. Just "I dislike the results so they must be fake for sure". You aren't any better than MAGA screaming 'election fraud' few years ago. Wake me up when fraud is proven.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Hard for there to be proof when both sides REFUSE to investigate it, which should be enough motivation to investigate.

    But you go ahead and continue to believe that the one time Donald Trump DIDN'T cheat at everything was the one election he MUST win to stay out of prison. Oh, yeah, and Musk and Putin publicly declared that they intended to help him.

    But they were just kidding, right?

    MAGA has such a good reputation for integrity that there's no reason to investigate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (10 children)

    That's because extreme right propaganda ecosystem from fox news or Bezo's censorship of WaPo to social media like musk's buyout of Twitter to Joe Rogan to Russia and Israel supporting Trump aren't included in those numbers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Or maybe, just maybe, Harris campaign was shit and she lost to the jackass due to her sheer incompetence?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

    No, I don't think that's the case here. I've been both right and now left in America over the years and she ran an objectively great campaign relative to the surrounding variables (short time, recovering economy and poor approval rating of Biden, and all the other things I mentioned that you ignored).

    I mean, was she my ideal pick? Nah. But she was obviously better than Trump and ilk in every single way, if you ascended above the right-wing propaganda I mentioned.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Objectively great? She lost to the worst previous president we'd ever seen, who'd literally attempted a coup after losing re-election just a few years earlier. She had almost unlimited money, and instead of absolutely unloading on the POS, she ran a pretty typical, run-of-the-mill style campaign. She could have produced sooooo many supercut ads of nothing but the POS being a stupid crazy POS during his first time, with just a tagline of "More of this? Really?" or something, and that probably would have done it. I live in a swing state, and her "attack" ads were fucking pathetic. There was likely fuckery, too, but it never should have been close enough for that to swing it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    You're telling me nothing I don't already know but continue to miss the point.

    The point isn't how bad Trump was or how milquetoast or excellent Harris was; it was a matter of an uneven playing field. Fascists control what people see. That is all that matters, second to maybe Biden forcing her to run a blitz campaign.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Oh, fascists somehow controlled Harris' ad content and ad buys? Guess I did miss that point, would love to hear more.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Circular reasoning. You've yet to establish the relevance of the premise in the first place.

    Yes, I think Harris made some errors, but really no major blunders relative to incessant scandals from Trump. It was one of the cleanest runs I've seen since Obama's 2008 probably.

    But that's just it now, isn't it? That Harris needed to run a FLAWLESS campaign and do EVERYTHING right, while Trump can just trip and stumble, lie, cheat, steal, rape his way just fine.

    ... All because the Republican propaganda machine is very, very strong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    All because the Republican propaganda machine is very, very strong.

    No shit, that's the entire point, and why combating that with everything you've got in the form of blistering and effective ads is paramount, which she absolutely, positively could have done, but didn't for some reason. How is that circular reasoning, exactly?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Hindsight is 20/20; if perfection was easy, everyone would do it. Why they didn't isn't going to be figured out by a lemmy strategist. After all, it was her team who got Obama elected twice against a white war POW war hero and a rich white businessman. Not like they were traitors or some shit, lol.

    Look, these are all objective facts:

    • Harris had one of the best campaigns possible given the short time she had and surrounding forces.
    • Trump had ENORMOUS advantages, counter to the implied claim from the original user, claiming "she spent $1b and lost"
    • On hindsight, Harris team could've maybe performed better.
    • But, importantly, it should've been more than enough.

    So let's stop blaming the candidate, acting like "if you would've thrown a few more pebbles at the tank, maybe you would've won the fight! Weak!"

    Given all this, my compromise is this: Michelle Obama should run in 2028 because, like you said, we need all the advantages we can get. Democrats will not get a more perfect candidate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    To me it looked like the plan was to let cancer sick Biden run with Harris as Vice president who would later take the office due to Biden health issues.

    I think that was her dogshit strategy. It didn't work.

    And campaign itself was bad too. One of biggest fails was not appearing on Joe Rogan show - Rogan asked both candidates for interview. Trump appeared and scored like 50million views. Kamala just dropped the ball on this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago*

    Why do you assume that was her strategy?

    Personally, I put a lot of blame on Biden. He could've committed to one term, but admitted he later changed his mind.

    Joe Rogan had a huge part to play in that, by the way. He determined the schedule and refused to meet her half-way during the blitz of a campaign she had to do. Have you ever tried to schedule a meeting with someone who doesn't actually want to meet with you? It's easy to blow people off.

    Yes, I think Harris made some errors, but really no major blunders relative to incessant scandals from Trump. It was one of the cleanest runs I've seen since Obama's 2008 probably.

    But that's just it now, isn't it? That Harris needed to run a FLAWLESS campaign and do EVERYTHING right, while Trump can just trip and stumble, lie, cheat, steal, rape his way just fine.

    ... All because the Republican propaganda machine is very, very strong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent