I believe they were using it as an example of failure to corner the market, that is, in reply to the previous person's comment and not directly to the main post.

Lung cancer killed my pet and I imagine it killed many other people's pets too. Cancer also killed some of my other pets.

This is kind of blaming the victim: you think black or queer people did something other than existing to egg on hatred? True, some go out of their way to try to befriend KKK members and such, but that strategy has only makes a tiny dent on things. Once someone is pouring gasoline on your lawn in a cross, it's a bit too late to make friends.

It's amazing that if a post has two possible contexts, people always assume THEIR context is the clear one and anyone who doesn't assume it is an idiot (even if basic rules of implication in English would have the other context favored).

I think maybe you meant to link to AI Winter (which that link has a link to down at the bottom) as that article doesn't really support your point (that people within AI acknowledge it has hype cycles) at all, there's nothing about AI directly in it, although it does serve a refutation that 'hype cycle' means it'll go away; if that's what you meant your sentence was a bit odd.

PugJesus wasn't saying there would be no murders of minorities if Trump loses. They phrased things poorly, but what they meant was minorities are going to be thrown into concentration camps which is what the fascist nazis did.
Sarcasm implies you mean the opposite of what you said, generally:
'Fascism is when there are murders'
Yes. That is not the sole thing about fascism, but murdering everyone not in your personal social group is kind of a big deal in fascism. You making this statement sarcastic does not reflect well on you or your ability to wield the English language. If you wanted it to come across the way you wanted it to come across, you should have said 'Fascism is about when there are murders and nothing else'.
However, this would have revealed a deep misunderstanding of what your opponent was actually implying, and, ironically, strawmanning them.

I love the version of Superman where he growing up and is friends with Luthor and he's like 'I cannot tell him my secret because my dad would disapprove' and it's got accidental closeted queer vibes.
And there's this comic book (not in the same continuity) where Luthor is this mad genius who escapes from prison easily and Clark interviews him and he's like "I like you Clark, you're so humble and down to Earth, but I hate Superman who is the opposite of that."
and then Lois likes Superman more than Clark, at least to start with, in some versions I think.
And then with Brainiac there's the possible storyline of 'this computer has a lot of information stored on my lost culture but he is also an existential risk to all sapients everywhere in the galaxy ahhhhggg'.
And how will Clark deal with an environment where everyone is hostile to immigrants when he is one himself and also dedicated to upholding the law?
And the first comic where he interacts with Batman is actually fairly good: Batman threatens to bomb people if Superman unmasks him and Superman is like 'oh shit, he is not lying, I can hear his heartbeat', but Batman was actually threatening to explode himself. And the cartoon where Batman is fighting Brainiac and his costume gets ripped to reveal he was Superman all along was hilarious: "I did not predict this possibility." The Justice League series in general (part of the same continuity) was pretty good actually.

I like the potential stories there. There's so many emotional possibilities. Stories where he just punches stuff are indeed boring. He is, frankly, under-utilized as a character imo because many writers don't understand that, or think the solution is to make a version of him that is evil which still involves him punching stuff, or because they're scared to actually touch on political issues like immigration or queerness. (can you imagine how many people would explode if Luthor was an ex-boyfriend for both him and Lois and they bonded over how shitty Luthor was as a date lol.)

As someone who has actually tried to get government assistance, I suspect it was removed for being misleading, not because they actually believe there is 'no healthcare in the US'. Don't strawman people.
Poor people often cannot get healthcare, such as via lack of documentation, lack of means to actually get to the places they need to go, etc. In my case, the government invented a completely fictional job for me that I did not have and declared it meant I was not eligible, and gave me a time limit to respond that expired before I had the actual chance to respond. The window for applications is a very short time period and I live with people who frequently do not give me my mail before winging it some place random, so it can take me a week to find my own mail.
Someone living without a mailbox would have had zero opportunity: in that regard, I was 'lucky'.

Dead people may not have rights, but their very living family definitely does. When my dog died, I got upset when my mom kept trying to shove reminders in my face when all I wanted to do was forget for awhile - I can't imagine how I'd feel about an actual human being.

How would you like it if you were grieving and someone posted some tasteless shit about your loved one? (assuming you aren't a sociopath, of course, which may be a bit much considering this is the internet)

Neutralinos and squarks are entirely theoretical counterparts as part of an extension to the standard model, which were expected to be observed at the LHC as 'natural' but weren't and we have no concrete reason to think they exist; the Standard Model of normal matter still reigns supreme. However if there are really dark stars it does lend some actual support, and would be the first actual evidence.
Basically the idea is there might be a symmetry between bosons (spin 1) and fermions (spin 1/2), a 'supersymmetry', so that every known (fundamental) particle has a secret doppleganger. I vaguely recall one motivation was providing counter-terms, as if you add more matter it can blow up the Higgs, but the irony is the Higgs is fine if you just... Don't add any dark matter, like the asymptotic safety program pointed out and actually garnered a prediction of the Higgs mass with before anyone measured it. And everyone argued it would be more 'natural' if the new particles showed up at LHC energies. They didn't.
Personally I'm betting against it; supersymmetry has just actively had predictions working against it so far. The particles would end up introducing more parameters than they solve.

There is a much better explanation which is either MOND or MoND-mimicking superfluid dark matter causing structure formation a little sooner, plus early usual overestimation of the number of actual early galaxies. New data always takes a little time to analyze properly. Tired light is outdated.

@snazzy0933
Maybe try putting up signs saying 'ARMED AND DANGEROUS', 'NO TRESPASSING' and 'BEWARE OF DOG'. If you don't have a dog, you can just play dog barking sounds.
A dog on a chain in front of your door is a pretty good deterrent if you're willing to do that though.