Uh, all of us there are U.S. citizens by birth. The District of Columbia has no congressional voting power, either. Shall we ignore that, too?Well one of those cases is the hurricane from 20 years ago I just mentioned, lol. And Puerto Rico is truly an outlier case in a U.S. territory that doesn't have voting representation in Congress and isn't entitled to electoral votes for President. But sure, exploit their situation when it suits your argument.
You are making that argument for the first time that I have heard it. The AM preservation effort came from AM broadcasters themselves, supported by the NAB. The intent is to not further damage the efforts of nearly 5,000 U.S. AM stations, only a small percentage of which carry shows like Hannity. Far more are ethnic voices in a variety of non-English languages as well as religious operations.The narrative you're pushing echoes the Republican talking points being used to try to scare Democrats into voting for their agenda over some nearly fictional emergency resource ruse. They just want to mandate their beloved AM Radio conservative talk ecosystem while killing the platforms that don't parrot their rightwing propaganda.
The major conservative efforts are on cable, podcasts and the like. Many strategists, particularly Democrat party ones, believe that the Republicans managed non-broadcast media much better in 2024 than their opposition.Democrats in Congress need to wake up about this. The Republican strategy is clear, and I don't think there's any point for me to keep reiterating the point.
And we are talking about which medium will be the most durable in an emergency, and there is overwhelming evidence that the answer is AM. This is not about politics; it is about voices in a disaster.