If that happens, then it's going to be very good for the Democrats going into the 2018 elections.
Wrong dichotomy - I don't want it to be good for "the Democrats" or "the Republicans." I want things to be good for
the people. I make no mistakes about assuming that is more likely with one party or the other.
Right now either party is good for
some people and outright bad for others.
@UrbanGiraffe - it's not that the interview itself is good or bad or whatever. It's that an interview couched in "we have to do something, anything to remove a person in power" is acceptable. It just doesn't feel like it's really an issue of actual justice. That's what I meant by it not being good. Especially in this issue - I think it's hilarious (in a train-wreck kind of way) that people get mad if Russia somehow uses social media to get voters to vote one way, but they think it's fine if they use social media to get voters to vote their way. I guess there's the whole sovereign concept thing there, but in whose interest is voting one way or another really? I mean you have massive millions of people voting for both parties anyway, so the actual outcome of the election doesn't really align with massive millions of people's interests whatever way the ballots fall... but that's kind of the thing above when you make the fight about D vs R, rather than about meaningful issues. And yes, sometimes meaningful issues are linked heavily to D or R philosophy, but the average American doesn't know or care - they just care about that initial letter.
Until all our politicians start changing their job from "we have to get our party member elected" to "we have to get whoever gets elected to do things that actually benefit everyone", we're going to continue in this mess.