[ekidd]

> You really thing the adminstration's goal is for Americans to not have running water & electricity, thinking that will keep them in power? That makes no sense.

The GP post literally said that the goal was not to have free elections, and that the other things you mention were collateral damage, or at worst something that could be exploited to further the main goal. You took their two examples of collateral damage, implied the GP thought those were the goal, and ignored his actual claim that the goal was to end fair elections.

It's dangerous to pattern match what you read to something in your head, rather than paying attention to the claims someone actually made.

[andsoitis]

> The GP post literally said that the goal was not to have free elections

OK, let's assume that.

Goal is one thing. How far they're willing and able to go (and hence be effective in getting that goal) is a different matter. That's my argument.

The current adminitration has shown that their ego (adoration) is a limiting factor in what they're willing to do for power.

To wit, top Republicans warn GOP will face midterm election ‘bloodbath’. Why bother caring? Is it just political theater?