

Why do these sorts of people think, “we can’t stay in business if we’re not allowed to <description of abuse >,” means they should be allowed to abuse instead of put out of business? Does it really never occur to them that they should be supplanted by better alternatives?
Their heads are so far up their own asses they forget ‘if’ offers two solutions.
It is infinitely more likely that the stress of the campaign trail, opportunities to cheat, and competing demands of their separate ambitions would bring a couple to the brink of divorce than… this suggestion.