Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

(6,960 posts)

5. They put him back on the ballot after he was correctly taken off. It never should have gotten to the election stage

Wed Jan 15, 2025, 01:54 AM

Jan 2025

It’s the corruption in high places that he correctly banked on.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Jack Smith's report is just a blip on the radar [View all] In It to Win It Jan 2025 OP

He made a bet that his handpicked judges mattered more Blues Heron Jan 2025 #1

Had he lost the election, that would have mattered less In It to Win It Jan 2025 #2

Was it correct for the judicial branch Frasier Balzov Jan 2025 #3

Historians will find it important iemanja Jan 2025 #8

Wow, you've mapped out the entire future iemanja Jan 2025 #10

If you want to keep minimizing it iemanja Jan 2025 #7

The impact Cirsium Jan 2025 #11