Topline: I thought you were too smart to write something like this. I shall have to recalibrate.

Many of your questions can be answered with, "It depends why."

You apparently don't know the difference between unrest and political violence.

Projecting conservative behavior onto liberals is not a rational thing to do, they think differently. Attacking liberals for believing a cartoon version of conservatives by attacking a cartoon version of liberals is not intelligent argument: you plead for liberals to listen to what ordinary conservatives say at the end of an article that indicates you don't care what ordinary liberals have to say.

If you've paid the slightest attention to politics for at least the 40 years I've been following politics, you know that the right has very little use for the Constitution. Most censorship is now and has always been by conservatives. In a recent survey, almost half of Republicans say they support placing the Bible above the will of the people. Treating my gay friends as second-class citizens is the official position of the GOP.

"Conservatives generally reject the notion of "new" gun control laws in no small part based on the fact that existing laws are not enforced."

Why is this? Because conservatives have made it a priority to defang and block the implementation of existing laws. Do basic research, please.

You're either slippery with numbers or can't do basic math. I suspect the former. Example 1:

1. Trump voters made up less than half the electorate.

2. In September of 2016, Trump was not as widely popular as his final vote share.

Therefore, Hillary Clinton called less than 25% of the voting public "deplorable."

She also apologized for it and corrected herself as not actually meaning literally half. She was speaking of the hardest of the hardcore Trump supporters who are, by any reasonable measure, in fact deplorable.

If you characterize that remark as "characteriz(ing) half of the voting public as 'deplorable'," you are a liar or a fool. Pick one, there is no other option.

Example 2:

"Is it really the position of Rolling Stone that everyone that votes conservative is a racist mass shooter? … if there were 80 million racist mass shooters out there, these events would happen more frequently."

1. There were ~155M votes cast in 2020.

2. Biden received well over half.

3. Not all non-Biden voters voted conservative; some were more liberal, some were reluctant non-conservatives who merely preferred to vote against Biden.

3. Not all members of any party are mainstream.

4. The Rolling Stone article was an opinion piece.

Therefore, your numbers are incorrect, and you can't assume that the magazine's position bears any resemblance to your number.

If you've never heard of replacement theory, you either (a) live under a rock or (2) never actually read the Rolling Stone piece, because if you had, you'd know you'd been living under a rock.

George Will and the National Review no longer represent the mainstream of the Republican Party. A candidate with Will's positions couldn't win a GOP primary for dogcatcher.

If you aren't even going to try for the most basic levels of intelligence, coherence, or accuracy, then I've wasted far too much time on this as it is.