This is great. Also magnanimous of you not to refer to your past, superb writings about the Star Wars franchise. :)

It is an intriguing theory that is completely false. Cities were disassembling street car lines of their own volition or selling them off to national transit chains. Not GM.

It was immediately on the front screen of the New York Times . . .

Is every person who votes for Harris supportive of (say) the present administration’s policy on Israel-Palestine?

You exclude many possibilities with your false reduction to an either/or. And it’s pretty absurd to think that after Trump is gone we have 70 million enemies. It’s totalizing, reductive rhetoric that reminds me of . . . Someone.

I’m sorry, this uniform “they” rhetoric is not helpful or in any way accurate. It doesn’t-at all-reflect how people absorb and believe political claims.

I am as frustrated as anyone that the election is close, but it simply does not follow that the 70 million or so people who will vote for Trump are all supportive of violence.

How do you support the claim that 45 percent of the electorate want the violence? It’s a serious question. I see no data to support that.

It was a shit article, like many shit articles that ran in the New York Times. Fueled by shit sources. All of of these clowns think they’re Woodward and Bernstein and they have Deep Throat, when it’s some 25 year old West Wing staffer who doesn’t know their ass from a hole in the ground.

Weird to refer to Bill Clinton as genocidal. Histrionic even.