maybe not. All the provocative crepe he's already said must violate some civil rights laws or inciting hate crimes or something -- or so I would have thought.
Anyway even 538 mentioned tonight that there is some chance he might incite his supporters to civil unrest, causing problems for policing -- presumably meaning maybe riots and deaths, injuries and property damage, general problems -- They did not say it was likely, only that it was a possibility. One of them (it's a running commentary they do, creating a podcast, but I just read the running text updates) -- one of them said that there are legal commissions to look into that sort of thing, it isn't the proper province of candidates. They agreed he was out of line to say it, but they seemed to think the main thing is just that it casts a shadow on our democracy, makes us look bad to the rest of the world (since we're always promoting democracy, right?) -- Mostly it just looks bad -- as if Trump hadn't already done a thorough enough job of that.
It's a flip flop from his previous statement (1st debate) that he would accept the election results.
Why do they even ask a question like that? That's what I'd like to know: What's the point of the question being asked at all.
= new reply since forum marked as read
