@randahl Let's hope the mid term elections will change something but the damage is already done.

@randahl @Ilka4You Was about saying exactly same thing...

Did some research and it's quite manipulative presentation though, even though "Is it a good idea for the U.S. to take Greenland using military force?" still do have huge part of "don't know / skipped"
reuters.com/world/europe/just-…

@randahl I'd post it as first level comment as well - it's actually 4% .. it's manipulative usage of data...

reuters.com/world/europe/just-…

@schmaker @randahl These are two different questions: Do you approve of U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland? and Is it a good idea for the U.S. to take Greenland using military force?

@erwinrossen I know. But @randahl talks about attacking #Greenland .. that's why I correct it

@randahl that's not bad considering MAGAs can't handle map projections.

@randahl his main purpose in making noises about Greenland is keeping the media spotlight off the Epstein files

@randahl
Wow, more than half of his voters are die hard bolsheviky kingsmen

@randahl Half of Republicans “Ehhrrrmmm … not gonna burn my fingers on that one …”.

@randahl I am a bit worried that only 47% say Nay to attacking #Greenland. I expect a vast majority. Please.

Wow!

#USA is so much lost.

I can’t believe that they have not been expelled from #NATO .

Seriously: When they threaten to attack an ally, they are not an ally anymore and you don’t want to protect them.

@randahl What is wrong with that 17%????? 40% of republicans???? and 36% of US Americans don't know????? There is something seriously wrong with the US... oh wait, they elected a criminal for president. That was definitely a clue.

@peterbrown @randahl

I no longer believe in the "distraction" hypothesis. Both he and his administration are so horrible people that they are basically doing horrible things nonstop because it is in their nature.