I don't see how Nichols's statement is in contrast to this? He literally states how those terms didn't arise within politics as your citation states. He instead says it would benefit Dems if those terms disappeared, depriving Cons of that ammunition.
because cons strip mine literally every word anyone says anywhere for things to weaponise. Usually as an attack on "real americans like us." Obama wore a *tan suit*. He named a type of lettuce. People drank wine or lattes. Kids had avocado. It's not the words, it's the cons grievance pipeline.
Given that the cons use them as ammunition, seems like some sort of agency-related comment is called for, like, "Jesus Christ, the Republicans can't engage in honest debate any more"