A bank teller today illustrated how Bill Clinton may provide a "halo effect" for Hillary

[merrily]

54. Did you have a point? Or did you just see an ad hom about me and decide to pile on?

I ask because it will make a difference in how I respond. So, if you had a point, please be more specific because it's far from obvious to me.

Especially since Josh used the term further down the thread himself later in the thread and also admitted he has no problem with use of the term. (I wonder: Will you be taking that up with josh down thread, since you apparently do seem to have a problem with it?)

Meanwhile, no, I did not call the young man anything. Never met him. I referred to him as a low info voter in a post on a discussion board that, if he exists, he will probably never see and in which he is totally anonymous.

And, as my Reply 10, the very post to which you are replying, said:

I have no disdain for the 20 something young man described in the Op, whether real or invented.

I have posted many times that I paid little to no attention to politics until about 2004. I never even heard of DLC until after Obama was elected. I have no disdain for myself on that score. I, too was younger, had my hands full, and was relying greatly on my belief that just supporting Democrats and voting Democratic was doing my part to fix what was wrong with America. I too, labored until the delusion that all bad things in this country came from Republicans. I'm certainly not disdaining anyone, real or fictional for that.

Luckily, josh, your shameful tactics don't work with anyone but your choir, if at all. The rest of us see you.

Now, do you have anything at all that is true to say about my post? Anything at all factual or analytical? Anything that is not an ad hom that you derived from pretending my post was something other than it obviously was?