In the aggregate people are easily manipulated. We've known this since Freud. With mass media and the Citizens United decision, the elite have a much easier time pushing through their agenda. Obviously there is a lot more going on that can't be easily expressed in a brief forum comment, but it's just not true that the electorate is simply morally corrupt.

That is a high expectation of people being driven by predictable human emotions, lacking the ability to think critically through everything in front of them.

The real issue of our media landscape (information feeds controlled by the elite), probably could have been nipped in the bud some years ago but it may be a little too late for that.

The problem is greatly exacerbated by two-party system. If there was a solid third or fourth choice, then at least people wouldn't be given two bad (in their opinion) choices. Many people don't vote at all, being disillusioned with the voting system.

Can we do something about it? The winner-takes-all Electoral College certainly contributes to two-party system [1] and to narrow margins [2]. There are two states who don't do winner-takes-all (Maine and Nebraska), and we can force all states to split their electoral votes.

[1] https://www2.law.temple.edu/lppp/electoral-college-two-party...

[2] https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/108/3/727/11948...