In grammar, substantives and modifiers are ontologically distinct. A substantive (noun or verb) expresses an objective fact: the man laughed. A modifier (adjective or adverb) expresses a judgment about that fact (the bad man laughed loudly). Substantives can exist without modifiers, but not vice versa. A substantive is subject to proof: Was it a man? Did he laugh? A modifier isn’t.

Reporters favor substantives, which can be checked; bullshitters modifiers, where they can evade detection. Writers require both, depending. My initial drafts bristle with modifiers, which I then attempt to remove, letting substantives fend for themselves.

Compare the words of Harris and Trump. Harris favors substantives, as befits a prosecutor; Trump modifiers, as suits a huckster. When Trump asserts a fact, it’s untrue, unless the truth serves his persuasive purpose.

The difference in the candidates’ rhetoric reflects a difference in their characters. Humility opts for facts, accuracy, truth, acknowledging human errancy; arrogance disregards facts in favor of effect. A preference for substantives implies: It is so; a preference for modifiers – It is so if I say so.

The vileness of Trump’s character is exposed in the mess of his speech. To cheer Trump, one must look past his mendacious gobbledygook. It’s no surprise his supporters are less educated. I’m betting they’re also less inquisitive, though I’ve seen no data on that. Harris’ orderly grammar evokes a commitment to candor. I don’t know the lady, but I trust her.

Who, I keep wondering, would prefer a liar to a truth-teller, a blatherer (to put it kindly) to a straight-speaker?

Many Americans, it seems, are incurably stupid. This is observation, not condescension. Many speakers at the Democrats’ convention urged conciliation and inclusion: that’s good politics but how on earth can you manage it if a dummy can’t or won’t see what they’re being shown? Try talking facts to a Trumpster and you’re accused of concocting them. Point to Trump’s lies and you’re breezily assured “They all do it” – a false equivalence.

We need the votes of dopes to save the world: either we make nice or lose democracy. I leave that to the politicians. If allegiance to honesty, common sense, and candor makes me an elitist, I’ll accept that label. I’d like to be good neighbor, but not at the expense of truth.

An amazing thing about the Democrats’ amazing convention, which mesmerized and exhausted Jane and me for four days, was the absence of nonsense. Having expected plenty of cringe-worthy hoopla – this was politics, after all – we found ourselves mostly nodding, rooting. Well said, I kept saying, well said.

I believe the right candidates will win on November 5, not because they’ve got the best programs, but because they’re the best performers. Not since 2008 have I felt so pumped about a Presidential ticket – or maybe ever, because today’s risk is so dire. Harris and Walz are just what the doctor ordered – and novel enough, for the next ten weeks, not to become old hat. Hope so buoys me, I feel giddy.

Some will see a right result Election Day as a vindication of democracy. To me it looks like luck. We no more deserved this rescue than lottery winners their jackpot.

Such debates are for later. For now we must all heed Michelle Obama’s stirring adjuration and “Do something.” Each of us must – every day. If you can’t think what to do, think again. Give, knock on doors, yammer to any wafflers, steal Trump voters’ car keys so they can’t get to the polls (just kidding). This is the election of our lifetimes, and we can win (no kidding).