So my plan is that we mail rifles to him by post, and he will be so touched by the gesture that he will immediately step down and then blow his brains out.
It's a long shot, but I think its worth the effort. Plus, the winner of the rifle he chooses gets a 2-day pass at DisneyLand.
Sort of. We forget the earliest primaries were kind of shaky, and Hayley and DeSantis came in with a lot of steam. The catch there is, if you’re anti-trump, those two aren’t much better and might somehow even be worse.
Thankfully a lot has changed since then. Back then not even most Democrats thought he was as unhinged as he's been acting in public since Kamala Harris took over the ticket.
"trump is the worst. He has no ideas, he's just an awful, bigotted, racist piece of shit. Nobody likes him."
"Oh. Who are you going to vote for?"
"...I guess I have to vote for trump."
The problem is that a normal person can be talked into doing something not in their best interest. A narcissist could only ever be lured away to something bigger.
That's an interesting framing device you've got there; But yes, in the cases of antisocial personalities and narcissists. They have a markedly diminished capacity for empathy.
"Having the capacity for free will" is not even remotely the same as "being capable of making completely disposessed choices in every single circumstance". When considering one's options, different people in different situations give different weights to different factors.
Consider a person acting under the threat of being murdered if they don't comply with some demand, like in an armed robbery. The fact that making certain choices, like refusing to cooperate, is in practice nearly impossible for them in this case has no bearing on whether or not they "have the capacity for free will" in a general sense. Likewise someone being manipulated by a person they fell in love with.
In the same vein, a narcissist is strongly compelled by internal factors to act only in ways that gratify their overinflated ego. While it may conceivably not be 100% impossible for them to go against this compulsion, it is extremely unlikely that it will even occur to them to do so, and given that it does occur to them to do so, it is extremely unlikely that they will choose that course of action. They act in predictable ways for this reason. The weights they place on certain factors are consistently different from average. This is entirely unrelated to the question of "free will".
You made the original claim without citing any sources or even making a logical argument. I presented my reasoning. There is absolutely no reason for me to go to the trouble of citing sources when you made zero effort at all.
Also, facts that are common knowledge and/or self-evident do not require sources unless specifically challenged, and everything I said is both of these things.