Haven't brought myself to watch/listen, but a PoliSci professor I mostly trust says that his presentation is fascinating and some of what he says about identity politics is worth talking about.

I don't think you can quote him saying "followers, go physically harm people" — but then, I don't think you can quote Charles Manson saying it that directly, either. The incidents already under heavy discussion here, including in the above article — the doxxing, the singling out of students by face and name — such…

That article says no such thing.

Alright. I can take that.

No, straight up, I think that is a totally accurate statement.

True, but my sense is that you're underestimating the disaster on our hands right now.

I'm not out seeking other causes, I'm just talking about what happened.

That was pretty striking, how you brushed aside the recent shooting within like the first three words of that fairly lengthy post. Also, regarding 'incitement of bodily harm', you're aware that case could be made that that is basically Milo's entire shtick, right?

This was the reality: Hillary or Trump was going to be President. It shouldn't have taken more than about a nanosecond to decide to support Hillary. While committing, of course, to do your best to hold her feet to the fires you care most about after she actually won the election.
I don't discount our nation's…

And the words of losing candidates wind up amounting to what?

You don't move anyone's policies any way at all before you successfully elect them. You see, call me crazy, but I had this awful nightmare where the left let the perfect be the enemy of the good, focused on the flaws of the sane candidates, and helped the ridiculous jackass win the election.

Through the use of Bill Maher's words, indicated as such with quotation marks.

The way I read it, the "us" and "them" thing was specifically dealt with in the post. Point #3.

But the criticism of Islam today is almost always closely linked with the profiling and targeting of Arabs in just that way.

Has it occurred to you that, unless you for some reason remove the entire 2016 election from consideration and take that quotation into some kind of "only racial sensitivity matters" vacuum chamber, the point Maher was making was accurate and important?

Disagreed with, I meant.

OK, but I don't believe the good faith of the question, because every hour or so some new person appears in the comment thread to pull the same "but wait, what's so bad about Milo, can't you accept being agreed with" BS. The article here was only two paragraphs long, and it contained links to examples of his…

If it was an honest question, it came from total ignorance.

I don't think you're completely wrong here, but it's worth noting that the people in power nowadays don't even worry about precedent or established norms, and in a significant sense those who do are hobbled in their struggles against them.

But Velociraptor didn't sweep anything under the rug — the post you're responding to was very thoughtful.