The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/341114-kkk-plans-to-bring-guns-to-va-rally

*crickets*

So, my post was edited by a moderator, but not the posts in reference? Neat. Biased moderation again, coupled with Tatsu's gloating of "us similar-biased will take care of each other and silence you out".

Yeah, just be the only one allowed to be heard, that will always mean you're right. It's wrong when you prohibit the voice of voting to minorities, but it's okay if you prohibit the voice of someone based on the merit that you don't like what they're saying.

I am and apparently will always be, the only consistent person in these entire forums. What I hated 11 years ago, I still hate, and will still hate in 11 years, and is an actual "wrong". What Hillary Clinton hated 11 years ago, will be what she supports today, and goodness knows what her stance on it will be in 11 years.

Like the electoral college. My opinion was always "weighted voting makes more sense, than 6 cities ruling an entire nation... or the more likely situation of the 42 unrepresented states with any urban population whatsoever, seceding and laying hefty tariffs on their produce and resources exported to the rest of the nation". My opinion was also always that "winner-take-all was counter-intuitive for individual representation in the federal election". Maine doesn't do it, it splits it's electoral vote. They have it figured out.

The rest of the nation is all divisive pieces of **** that knee-jerk every election into wanting to abolish the electoral college. Some self-proclaimed professional intellects among present company, included. The same present company, that makes it hard to trust someone who says "I'm a doctor" on an airplane mid-flight without credentials to back it up. Apparently, if you ask anyone, they'll tell you they're an expert with 25 years of experience working in a field for a high salary, and you'll google them to find out they ARE 25 years old. ...or, they're 85 and the field they are talking about was just pioneered 21 years ago.

While my opinion was always the standard, some professionals in every field here, are going to tell me they're the founder of civil rights and all that they mean. They're going to talk about bathroom liberties, and call me a Nazi, and in what I bet will be 7 years or less, we'll just start converting to single-occupancy facilities with shared handwashing. Excuse me for disregarding your civil rights for the LGBT, by expressing my own against female-segregated facilities, which defends you tenfold since plenty of women's activists strictly stand in opposition to bathroom liberties in the first place.

Oregon is establishing wage gap checks. It'll probably take another 7 years before the checks can and do apply to any establishment favoring the hiring and wages of female employees over male ones. I have personally seen one such establishment, the protection of civil rights will only work if they don't target a specific demographic, the wording has to be (unlike so many of Trump's failed travel bans) completely absent of any target demographic, in order to protect everyone equally.

There are plenty of breast cancer charities that do not donate to men, even at the disproportionate rate that men get breast cancer, even 1% of donations, and yet prostate cancer itself even receives way less funding. It wouldn't be misogynistic to force donations to go to the proper proportion of gender of patients... it would be EQUAL.

It'd sure as **** be nice to see that equality extend to arrest and sentencing. How, you ask? (without letting criminals go or arresting the innocent). Well, if we are to believe that the genders commit crime at even close to the same rate, which there's no reason they wouldn't when women are "so oppressed in career opportunity that money would be a stretch", then you simply don't release a woman with a warning or community service, on charges a man's going to jail for, and/or you release a man with a warning for anything you'd release a woman fore. That already isn't done, and I don't see any advocates protesting for it.

I published that one in this thread awhile back. glad we agree : D see they ARE on topic and you enjoy them too.

you know alot of what you say is a stance I can back (or parts of it).

But how you manage to twist it into a conservative conclusion is beyond me.

take this :

glad you experiencing it is turning out to be a constructive experience for you ... (?) at least I agree. it just blows my mind when you go from there to shitting on libertarian ideas and anyone standing up for blacks mistreated by cops ect....

it's a step in the right direction but it still confuses me how you can't bridge the two for how obviously out there they are.

I just find the sheer willpower required to make that work in your head mesmerizing.

Yup. Rioters aren't there to protest, they are there to riot. Sadly it steals the attention of the real protests, and it just doesn't get anyone anywhere.

As long as one is critical with regards to the research, it's not nearly as big as a problem as it's made out to be here. These reports aren't there to mindlessly quote. Strange, bad or conflicting results are still results and can still be useful.

Actually your post and tatsus post both were changed to use a spoiler to reduce the amount of scrolling needed to get past them.

Casual reminder to @thetrophysystem and anybody else who invokes the "I know an X therefore I can't be Y-ist" argument:

"women's activists opposing bathroom liberties" are called transphobes. It's called being transphobic. Just because they campaign for women's rights, doesn't render them perfect, or some kind of "liberal gotcha".

Just like knowing black folk doesn't make you not racist, calling yourself a feminist doesn't absolve you of other bigoted behaviour.

Oh. Okay. Except. You're biased.

If everyone's "-ist", then it's just women's activist, "equalist" (who are apparently terrible people from what I hear), LGBT activists, religious freedom activists, racial activists, and police activists, all dividing up in 15% groups and fighting against everyone's rights while winning no rights with a 15% support for it.

You don't even pretend to even acknowledge anyone else's words. You're right, and everyone else is alt-right apparently. It's an excellent idea to "get your way", until you can't even muster in-party support to win an election. The LGBT wouldn't fully support Clinton, women wouldn't fully support Clinton, the poor class wouldn't fully support Clinton, if your candidate can't get any support, then your main problem is that you can't legislate when your politicians didn't get elected. Shooting opposing politicians, won't help get yours elected btw, take note liberals.

Quit, for the umpteenth time, insisting your "inclusive morals" can triumph without the inclusive support of a single other mother ******* soul. That's not how politics work, everyone gets liberties when they protect each other's liberties, everyone loses liberties when they fight like children trying to mass-incarcerate each other with labels like "alt right scum" and "bathroom pedophiles". I agree the latter is grossly negligent, but as I do that, liberals are calling southerners cow fuckers and not even giving a ****.

My argument is that everyone should get liberty, and divisive liberal argument always seems to be "southerners shouldn't be allowed to vote or breed". Harsh much?

You linked Sargon of Akkad. I can call you whatever political ideology I want.

Also, you're doing that weird thing where you think I'm an American liberal who supported Clinton. Again.

You're acting too cool to be caught cooperating with literally anybody else on politics, everything has to go your way or not at all.

I can call you whatever political ideology I want.

Saying that I support Clinton is a statement of some kind of fact (wrong, though), not an ideology. The same goes for perceiving me to be American.

You do realise how idiotic you sound just parroting peoples' points back to them in the hope it will silence them? That's like, 5-year old schoolground talk. "I said you were but what am I" kind of reductive immaturity.

I mean, you don't like being called a troll, so you're doing this unironically? You actually believe this? You're not simply doing this to get a rise out of fellow forum members in a non-constructive manner?

again with the "one idiot to denounce a whole movement" attempt.

seriously if you guys dig that logic so much then why can't it apply to Trump as well?

anywho it's representative of lackluster arguments that this is the best and only thing you got.

I do like the running theme that the only people ever who ever disagree with conservative ideology must be liberals, who are apparently sick, ill, twisted, delusional, infantile and oh - the people who call conservatives names because they can't handle reality.

(I'm getting this from the comments elodea. And / or the video, most conservative YouTubers spout the same buzzwords)

The whole ideological spectrum, and there are only conservatives, liberals, and communists who are also the Real Nazis (because socialism, obviously).

Really I should write a longer post on this, but again, echo chambers, etc. It was positioned as a purely a) left-wing and b) youth-oriented concept (often used in the same breath - and indeed sentence - as "safe spaces"), but the reality is everyone has them. Sitting there watching some conservative attention-seeker trash people she doesn't know on YouTube? That's your safe space, @elodea. That's your echo chamber.

I don't read that thread. You'd have to report things for me to care.
Also yeah sure I am biased. Who isn't. I don't moderate much around the politics thread, because of that. But your endless list of quotes was a glaring formatting issue. No content was changed.

I don't even. wtf is that supposed to even mean.

This is a discussion thread Elodea, not youtube. At least be bothered to briefly describe the topic and why specifically we should care.

I don't care about the handshakes (judging from the video title). Trump made it a big deal with his stupid antics, and people responded in kind.

Why are you so triggered and defensive? Did i address it to you? If that wasn't your reaction, why do you care?

@tatsujb

I think devak is calling you out bro.

So you think he made a big deal out of handshaking... by handshaking? I don't think even I could come up with such ideologically zombified logic in satire.

1. Post something.
2. People respond like people on a forum are wont to do.
3. U TRIGGERED BRO?!?!?!!

Bonus points for talking about other peoples' zombified logic

There's a visible and depressive change in the quality and tone of your posts over the past 6 to 18 months. As someone we all know of would say: SAD!