Once someone pulls the trigger, their “views” are immaterial to me. IMO the only question is if the government is making good faith, Constitutional attempts at preventing future violence by people who share such “views.” Since we seem to be governing by social media hits, I think we know the answer.

did u see the fuckin chainsaw howard

You also don't have to wait for any group to organize you to call your reps. If you ever see something in the news that shocks you or makes you mad, call your reps and tell them to DO SOMETHING. Local reps, too! They're often the most responsive! Find your reps here: reps.fyi

here ya go

I don’t! I was pointing out that in contacts with actual voters over the course of many years I neither used the terms nor did any voter mention them as a reason they wouldn’t vote for a Dem. My experience, though limited, indicates “woke” language is not an issue with persuadable voters.

Well I operate on a need-to-know basis, keeping my ears open and my mouth closed.
All I need to know is how
to show respect to other human beings, how to maximize the chances of good governance, and how to minimize the chances of bad governance. I’m simple
like that.

My sample size is only in the thousands. But I can tell you that I found more
people who were concerned about being allowed to hunt on Sundays than concerned
about language. And that was one guy with a mullet and a John Deere ballcap.

Oh for goodness’ sake. enough! My first canvassing experience was for Bill Clinton.
My last was for Indivisible in 2018. I don’t even know what some of these phrases mean! The only one I ever used is LBTQ even though I’m not really sure what Q is.

Just. Stop.

I was waiting for this!

Ok - so I'm going to do a real context+write up but for now, here's what some of these things look like.

To start my data reference is DCinbox which is ~208,000 official e-newsletters over the past 15 years.