Addressing Zoomerslop. Here's a Zoomerslop quote: "President Trump has remade the Republican Party by refusing to alienate people, but alienating bad ideas. And I think that's a playbook for preserving the political coalition for the future." Here's why it's wrong: You cannot do this when some of the people in your coalition are any of the following: extremists, radicals, subversives, or plants. You must actually remove those people, not just their ideas, unless you can "turn" them. The reasons vary. Extremists: We must exclude extremists because they are greater liabilities than they are assets. By being extreme, they cause injury to the cause, the movement, and the reputations of people who are associated with them. Radicals: We must exclude radicals because radicals are radical, which means by definition that their real objective is to tear out the existing apparatus, principles, beliefs, organization, leadership, etc., by the roots (that's what radical means, radix, roots). Their agenda, then, is not to be a fellow traveler or helper but someone who wants to fundamentally transform what we have. They also tend to be extremists. Subversives: We must exclude subversives because they act in bad faith and with hostile intent. They are not even genuinely aligned with us but seek to undermine us from within, again by definition. If you tolerate subversives, you will eventually be subverted and pursuing different goals (usually ones hostile to your original beliefs) by different means before long. Plants: Plants (or infiltrators) must be removed for obvious reasons. They're not even "us." They're the enemy within, wolves in sheep's clothing, Democrats pretending to be us in order to ruin us, largely by encouraging the above three types. They must be removed. In my opinion, President Trump (and Charlie Kirk) have been too focused on "coalition" and have allowed this mess to fester, although Trump has been clear repeatedly that he does not want bad actors, white supremacists, racists, antisemites, or any of that radical riff-raff as part of his coalition. The check has come due on that problem now, and I'm not certain we can afford it. We should want the largest coalition we can achieve, but that coalition should only include people who (a) do not want to overthrow, subvert, or destroy what we're doing from within, either to break it (plants) or repurpose it (subversives), and (b) who actually support the real agenda of saving America, not according to some stupid modified subversive definition ("Heritage American" discourse). That is, we should welcome everyone, regardless of background and party who 1) Actually loves America and wants to get it back on track according to what it actually is without trying to redefine it 2) Will operate in good faith and responsibly in that effort. We should not allow in troublemakers, subversives, plants, radicals, and extremists in the name of "coalition." That is a losing strategy, not a winning one, and it is intrinsically unstable.