This is precisely the part that you fail to understand: some people prioritize not dragging the US into another war over having to endure the media overblowing

This is precisely the part that you fail to understand: some people prioritize not dragging the US into another war over having to endure the media overblowing tweets from a moron. Those who are able and willing to endure the propaganda barrage to get their low-taxes, not-war, pro-individual freedom policies upheld and enacted look at the bipartisan system and see that they have two choices: a candidate which is behind escalation of wars and political assassinations in foreign soil, and a candidate that brought troops home and deescalated relationships with historical enemies such as the North Korea dictatorship. Between those choices, if you value policy over tabloid propaganda and you are already quite used to see a candidate repeatedly portrayed in bad light, isn't the choice pretty clear to you?