Yeah, but you didn’t stick to any of that, did you? You called her corrupt because she was currently unemployed, you claimed she was compromised because she allegedly was supported by her parents, then you claimed she wasn’t trustworthy because you found out she had a husband who could support her, then you claimed that acts of charity were signs of corruption…

If you had said “I don’t like that she’s from out of our district” and stuck with that, this might have been a productive conversation about the nature of districting, local representation, digital communications, globalization, etc. You might have been able to persuade me of your view in a conversation like that.

But you didn’t do that.