Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped “wars with France,” after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to “close the deal.”

Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.

Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.

  • auzy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    She passed the bar exam and operated as a lawyer for years independently defending special assault victims and others victims. She never went bankrupt and has been successful

    Trump boasted you need to be “quite” smart to win golf club championships during the debate with Biden, he went bankrupt multiple times and raped women. He can’t even hang onto lawyers

    Yet Republicans are now calling kamala incompetent

  • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Is it too much to ask her to go on a 10 minute rant about someone she showered with had the best vagina and every single lady that showered with her spoke highly of how great her vagina is?

  • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I’ll take the downvotes, but a large part of this is because she’s a woman. “One candidate (a man) can rant about gibberish while the other (a woman) has to be perfect.” doesn’t just apply to politics, this sounds like every office I’ve ever worked in.

    • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      a large part of this is because she’s a woman.

      the slogan I’ve seen on some shirts, “good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge” comes to mind.

      • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 hours ago

        As a straight white man, I wouldn’t mind wearing a shirt that says “Good thing they only want equality and not revenge” and let people guess who it is referring to.

      • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        the slogan I’ve seen on some shirts, “good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge” comes to mind.

        Jesus Christ, I love that so much.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      5 hours ago

      For sure.

      It does not help that her town hall tone was very… very … I don’t know… pleading/worrying/low energy. I almost had Hillary feelings at some points.

      She had fire, spirit… her campaign has toned down a lot since the DNC… Which is unfortunate.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          There is what? I can see the difference between pre DNC Kamala and post DNC, can’t you? The tone is more tempered and she is sometimes almost whiney in her conversations, way too coached.

          Before the DNC she was way more relatable, joyous, and direct. A powerfully woman that I think a lot of people looked up to. Now every answer goes back to the talking points… she hardly answered any questions or committed to anything. Even her running mate toned down.

          She is still a better choice over a rambling senile fascist but I think the US deserve the pre DNC Kamala and I hope that’s what they get when she is elected. A powerfully woman that is not controlled by the democratic party.

          The double standards applied to her are misogynistic and the media is doing everything to samewash trump and put weight on Kamala to be perfect. Trump has concepts of a plan and the media goes on and on how Kamala should show direct policy plans and have it all figured out. Trump was president for 4 years but her track record as VICE president seems to be the point of debate. It’s disgusting.

          From a non Americans viewpoint I also have to say that it probably does not help that the Dems platform now seems very close to bush republicans on a lot of things… the Overton window moved… a lot.

          • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            48 minutes ago

            There is what?

            there’s the ridiculous double standard.

            take every critique you have for her - pleading/worrying/low energy - they all apply in spades IF NOT MORE to trump.

            and no one’s questioned Kamala’s loyalties, but Trump’s talking to putin on the regular.

            YET SOMEHOW THIS IS STILL A CONTEST? double standard bullshit

  • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    One side expects their candidates to hold some standards, the other side doesn’t care. It’s like watching a sporting event with a homer who only sees the world based on how it effects their team winning or losing. Fairness doesn’t come into play, the other side is always cheating and getting favored media exposure.

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I had a thought about this; fascism exists because there are evil but effective ways of swaying people. By scapegoating immigrants and providing propaganda, he’s doing exactly what other fascists have done (including Hitler) to great success.

    It’s like any other good vs evil things, the good guys always have extra hurdles to deal with, like a super hero who has to save civilians and can’t just sucker punch the baddies. Too bad this is reality, and the good guys aren’t guaranteed to win…

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      it also shows how complicit media is in fascism and how any law that would enforce factual reporting by bringing conduct before a jury to decide whether intentional lying occurred by a celebrity or media platform would undermine fascistic lies.

      • Wrench@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Except half the jury would be comprised of people who either support those lies, even knowing they’re lies, or don’t care enough to form an opinion.

        You would need a population that is both concerned with the rule of law and break from political teams enough to fairly examine arguments for bad faith.

        We do not have that population. Any jury would be split or worse.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Realistic rebuttal: juries seem to have very easy times convicting trump in court cases.

          Theoretical/contextual rebuttal: I would also note that juries are how we convict criminals in this country. If you’re saying the lesser task of just making a determination that somebody is knowingly lying is beyond the purview of a jury then our entire court of law where the juries determine far more than that should be called into question.

  • Gorillazrule@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 hours ago

    To me it seems like less of a double standard and more of a representation of the divide between Americans.

    Trump gets plenty of criticism from all around. Including from the same people that are also criticizing Harris. But his voter base is in full support of the stuff he’s spewing, and will believe anything he says wholesale. Even if it’s crazy, or unsubstantiated, or demonstrable lies.

    The people who make legitimate criticisms of Harris are not supportive of trump. But them criticizing Trump will not change Trump. He already has unwavering support from a large number of people. Why would he do anything to gain the support of someone who is willing to call him out on his bullshit and hold him to an actual standard? And it’s not going to change the minds of any of his cult-like voters. However they do have hope that by criticizing Harris they might see her actually make changes towards becoming a candidate they wholesale fully support. Not a candidate that they are forced to choose because of the alternative. But a candidate that they actively want to be elected. These criticisms might also be persuasive to other Harris supporters and call them to be vocal and advocate for her to change as well.

    So it’s less of individuals having double standards and treating the candidates differently, but the two polar opposite standards that the voter bases have.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      the media often bandwagons along these things so end up with bizarre and insane juxtapositions of like Kamala Harris’ actual proposed housing policies being being compared with like speculation on how mass deportations and military invasions of cities will affect housing prices or something.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Problem with that is, she’s getting the pull from both sides, the far left and the disTrumpled right. She can’t do enough of what either wants without losing the other, and she needs both to pull off a strong enough win to save democracy. So she’s walking a tightthread while dodging spitballs.

      Meanwhile Trump is splashing about in his pigsty, slinging mud and shit, which his people gleefully eat and smear all over.

    • taterthotsalad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Someone who gets it. The reason he gets so much play time in the media is because clicks. You are contributing to the problem. Not being part of the solution. Ignoring a problem in the public is how you stop them. The reason they keep doing it is because it works.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      The truth is not better but there’s some nuance. Major media do not usually care about being for or against fascism. They care about clicks, and following “journalistic ethics” that boil down to Enlightened Centrism™ and bothsidesism.

      Their billionaire owners don’t even have to interfere (most of the time). The system self-selects to make money through a shared set of beliefs in what constitutes “proper journalism”. This makes journalists, as a profession, ontologically incapable of fighting against fascists. They truly, honestly, firmly believe that “Fascist about to win US Presidency” is not a statement of fact.

      It’s the same ideological pitfalls that makes Serious Media pit science against whichever anti-science fad is trendy right now. Vaccines, “climatic skepticism”, etc. anything goes and the journalists in charge truly genuinely from their heart believe that is a fair and balanced approach.

      Not to say there aren’t actual conspiracies from time to time of course, but even actual independent traditional journalism has generally failed to accurately report on the rise of fascism.

      • AshMan85@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        No, they definitely care for Trump to be elected. Major media is owned by oligarchs. Oligarchs support fascism. Plan and simple

    • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      100
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You mean the ones whos mega-rich owners are being promised massive tax cuts by trump? Those very same ones?

      I’m shocked to my core. I’m glad I was sitting down when I read your comment.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        9 hours ago

        But but but there’s no direct physical evidence of these major media owners handing giant round bags of cash with big dollar signs on them to trump personally while they twirl their moustaches!!!

        Don’t you see - we can’t know if they support him or not!

        /s obvs christ some people on here are russian trolls or steadfastly refuse to understand a goddamned thing

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 hours ago

      And the few sources that may not be owned by Trump-backing Nazis still have to have their horse race. They want to make it seem close to get clicks and sell ads.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Trump is the best thing to happen for News Media since 9/11.

        And they would do anything to have another 4 years of people obsessively watching/viewing/clicking all day every day to see what insane thing hes done to the country next.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 hours ago

      …but the magabrained keep telling us that the corporate media is all liberal! Their proof? Supposed polls of the help at those MNCs. I’d like to know in what universe the help determine the direction of a MNC.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        What’s new is how far down they’re willing to go to continue to do that.

        “New” as in - in the last decade. Not like, new new.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          With someone so stupid and weird and gross as donnie, it’s become nearly impossible to hide the corporate game.

  • themachine@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.

    Time is up.

    If people are “undecided” they aren’t going to even consider media fairness or maybe even logic at this point.

    It’s Donald Fuckin Trump. Rapist. Fascist. Liar. Cheat. Insert hundreds of other negatives and reasons why he should not have power and be in jail.

    It’s voting time. That’s all that’s left. He won the media and the narrative enough to make it a race at all. Pointing it out now is fruitless - he got away with that shit for his purposes.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It has been pointed out for as long as Trump is running against any candidate but it didn’t change a thing. If anything, the double standard only got worse over the years.

      • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        I was hopeful when media figures started to ask themselves how to better cover Trump after 2016. NPR and On The Media had some decent journalism panels where they dug into the problems with obeying long-standing rules/norms to cover a candidate that weaponizes them. I saw a possibility for real reflection and maybe a significant course correction. That door slammed shut like 2 fucking years ago, and they’ve played EXACTLY the same game over this campaign. I knew we were fucked when a reporter came on after the Biden-Trump debate to say, essentially, “…and some of Trump’s supporters have claimed, without evidence, that Joe Biden has died.”

        That’s it. That was the end of her coverage. They can’t even bring themselves to open their eyes long enough to observe unequivocally THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT DEAD. If the American experiment fails, a shitload of blame will lay at the feet of the media, who have long since abandoned their pursuit of "T"ruth in favor of the toxoplasma of rage.

        • FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I completely forgot about this until I read your comment. My grandmother whole-heartedly believed Biden was a clone or had been replaced by a doppelganger by the middle of his first year as President, and that he had died of covid. By then she had stopped watching FOX and moved on to OANN.

    • Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      9 hours ago

      It’s weird that there’s a person that you can call a liar, rapist and con man and not be afraid of being sued for libel or slander, and lots of people think he’ll be great at running a country.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.

      For this election, sure, but there is still a good reason to acknowledge the double standard that has been ongoing for decades now that it is comically blatant. It might be acknowledged by low information idiots in the future.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      10 hours ago

      A lot of people are answering undecided on polls in protest over Harris support for the Israeli genocide but intend to actually vote for her due to the significantly worse threat posed by Trump. She could massively improve her polling numbers by just committing to stopping arms shipments to Israel and imposing sanctions on them.

      • SolNine@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        This is highly unlikely to cause a statistically significant difference in the polls. Having this strong of a view point on the matter is largely isolated to a specific demographic of younger, progressive voters, who are notoriously difficult to reach and accurately account for via traditional polling methods.

        It registers as the 15th most important issue via a Gallup poll, and that doesn’t account for which “side” the individuals polled support.

        Of the 30% of the population saying it is an “extremely important issue,” it gives no indication of what their desired resolution is.

        On the extreme end of the spectrum, consider that 30% of our nation is in a death cult that believes Israel plays a role in their eventual salvation, not to mention how many people are blatantly racist and view anyone with darker skin as a terrorist.

        I am registered, politically active, not difficult to locate and have had the same phone number for 20 years, yet, I MIGHT have been polled once in that time!

        This isn’t to say there aren’t those who are doing as they say, but it is not likely to move polls one way or another.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        That’s actually a pretty idiotic way to “protest.”

        Wow, we’ve got inaccurate polls. Good job?

        • orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Well, the poll is accurate in so much as they really don’t “support” Harris and her policies. If we had a proportional voting system they would be voting for her near the middle of the pack with Trump of course in dead last. She’s just the second worst choice between the two choices we’re given.

          • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            She’s just the second worst choice between the two choices we’re given.

            “Best choice”. Seems way easier to say.

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Arms deals to Israel are codified into law. President can’t just “stop” them.

        Talk to Congress.

  • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    One side must bring peace to the middle east, the other side is allowed to tell Israel to kill Palestinians faster.

    And before someone comes defending their stance not to vote for either genocidal enabler, why aren’t you trying to save as many people as possible? Are you ok with more people dying because of your ideals? Enjoy living with that choice if he wins.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Harris should have ran for the side telling Israel to kill Palestinians faster then. She is wording her support for it more eloquently than Trump.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      46
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’m not even American but this voter-shaming is both frustrating to read and fucking stupid. Nobody—and I repeat, nobody—is going to vote because they were blamed by a random guy on the internet who refuses to acknowledge their very real concern that voting for Harris would be voting for genocide.

      • nfh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Opposition to genocide isn’t an option on the ballot, you can’t vote for it, especially not for president. And not voting sends a very clear message whether you intend it or not: “I don’t care”.

        Do you value minimizing harm? If you care most about genocide, Harris seems to be the least-worst option. But if you care more about ideological purity than harm reduction, you can vote for a non-serious candidate like Stein, or none at all. Nobody will ever solve this kind of problem at the ballot box, that isn’t how democracies work, but if letting things happen instead of exerting what little power you have eases your conscience, that’s your right. Doing so does mean a greater risk of a Trump presidency, especially if you live in a swing state.

        I would rather minimize harm, so I’m voting for Harris, and encourage others to do the same.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        And not voting for Harris gets you three genocides. Gaza, Ukraine, and the LGBTQ community at home. So, yeah, anyone that “can’t vote for genocide” is a moron or a shill.

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Cool. If people weren’t acting like morons I wouldn’t be calling them morons and if I was part of the Harris campaign instead of some asshole on the Internet I might try to be more diplomatic about it. But I’m not going to coddle a bunch of people who are to stupid to understand the implications of a two party system.

      • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        And given that American voters exist in a 2 party system, nobody should be under the illusion that they have any other choice. Don’t encourage people to delude themselves into thinking there is a better alternative. They’re right, you’re right, what’s the best option?

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          23
          ·
          8 hours ago

          That’s y’all’s problem to figure out, but bullying people into voting simply doesn’t work. Don’t respond to a statement of facts with “should”.

          • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            I’m not trying to bully people into voting, just making sure that this dangerously short sighted bullshit doesn’t go unchallenged. Thank you for proving my point.

          • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            6 hours ago

            They are not high info influencers they’re low-brow bullies with almost no understanding of the way the world works. Since they don’t have a leg to stand on morally, all they can use is accusations that others are as ignorant as they. So it’s not like they gonna stop, runnin their gums is all they got

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      It’s not as if it was a beacon of prosperity and joy before the US came in. I’m not sure it arguably got better/worse during the time… It was different for the US occupation, and now it’s back where it started. Lives lost, people traumatized, money thrown away, but at least some corpos got rich and PMC’s had their babtism of fire… Onto the next one.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Yes, but from '95 to '01 the Taliban also had a burqa mandate. It stems from the period the types like bin laden roamed Afghanistan free and used it as their training base. It attracted all the joyous spokes people for radical islam from around the world.

          During this period they also blew up those ancient statues because depictions of humans are haram.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Just one more year of occupation bro. I promise bro just one more year and it’ll fix everything bro. Bro. Just one more year. Please just one more. One more year and we can fix this whole problem bro. Bro cmon just give me one more year I promise bro. Bro please I just need one more year.

      Liberals oppose war challenge level: impossible.

  • esc27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    “liberal media” outlets are either actually run by conservatives or so obsessed with trying to appear balanced, they end up downplaying Trump and highlighting Harris issues. Combine that with the pure propoganda from conservative media, and the whole industry has a strong conservative slant…

    • Real news: Trump praises Hitler
    • “liberal media”: Trump praises WW2 leader, Harris eats pizza with a fork
    • Conservative media: FORK GATE 2024!!! Harris campaign in shambles!
  • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It’s not that she needs to be perfect, but - unfair or not - she DOES have to make a case for a bunch of disconnected dipshit “undecided” voters and clearly show how she will tangibly improve their lives.

    She already has my vote, but pretending people rolling their eyes at “I am going to add a Republican to my cabinet” is somehow a “purity test” isn’t compelling. The day she replaced Biden on the ticket she should have had been shouting “we’re going to bring our healthcare system up to modern standards and stop the barbaric practice of being the only major country on Earth with no universal healthcare solution” or “we’re going to remove medical debt” or “we’re going to tax all those billionaires like Elon Musk who are literally getting away with naked political corruption.”

    Yeah… I agree it’s not fair… but whining about “fairness” instead of doing EVERYTHING you can with the hand you’ve been dealt in order to stop the lying McDonald’s cosplaying fascist from slipping BACK into the office he almost toppled last time is absolutely insane.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Bingo bingo and bingo.

      She pivoted away from the base to a non existent center. These have been the core ideological principles of the democratic base for decades. And she doesn’t support them.

  • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Can any of you honestly say you have chosen which of the two is better based on how they speak? I think most are voting based on what they expect them to do.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Doesn’t anyone feel like this has been the case for a long time with anyone versus Trump?

    Actually, let me back that up, this seems to be a major Republican thing actually.

    Democrats will follow the rules and try out an exemplary candidate up for President (most of the time).

    Republicans will skirt the legality of everything possible to win with a candidate who embodies the worst human instincts and activity.

    Maybe I’m the only one who feels that?