Mod Logs

/r/moderatepolitics
spamcomment
AutoModerator
No additional details available
AutoModerator action:spam
spamcomment
AutoModerator
No additional details available
AutoModerator action:spam
distinguish
RECIPR0C1TY

Notice I did not say “character attack”. I said “comment on character”. That is a higher standard. The point is that we stay away from character entirely to avoid any chance of character offense. Go nuts on content. Stay away from character.

approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw

Weak? It has saved 10s of thousands of species from extinction, also that is what happens when you seperate the legislative and executive branch the President decides what/how to enforce things.

Not the prez foolt for weakending it, duh law foolt 4 been weak!

approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw

False, Birtherism is a refusal to consider Obama legitimate.

Because of racism.

Birtherism is racism.

distinguish
RECIPR0C1TY

Calling them a Bernie bro is a comment in character. You are intentionally trying to stir up a reaction with that. Stay away from character. Focus on content.

removecomment
RECIPR0C1TY

Why don't you go fill your kill boner by killing some hybernating bear cubs. Go back home to r/TheDonald

distinguish
RECIPR0C1TY

Take a few days to reread our sidebar, please. Further comments of this nature will change your temp ban into a permaban.

banuser
RECIPR0C1TY
User: Sac_keshi
Duration: 7 days
Description: Law of Civil Discourse
approvelink
RECIPR0C1TY
U.S. Significantly Weakens Endangered Species Act

[contents unavailable]

approvecomment
RECIPR0C1TY

Says the sub whose most upvoted potential democrat candidate is Joe Delaney who has never said one honest thing on a stage. Doesn't this prove that this statement is completely hilariously backwardly wrong?

Post me one thing that Delaney says and I will disprove it in seconds using the good ole google

I guarantee you will not find one verifiable fact that this corporate propagandist who made over 100 mill in insurance speaks.

Who did this sub claim is their least favorite candidate?

Well I'll let you self described "critical thinkers" figure that one out

removecomment
RECIPR0C1TY

Two, what exactly is the alternative here?

Molon labe. As I said earlier. I am not alone when I say an attempt at confiscation would literally be the trigger to open fire on the state.

No, it doesn't. There are members on both sides doing it and there are members on both sides who oppose it. Even if it were, that framing isn't helpful. You're alienating Democrats who could be on our side and providing cover for Republicans who are working against us. The framing only hurts us.

Yes, it does. I'll not lie for PR's sake.

removecomment
RECIPR0C1TY

No, but you have to convince the moderates, the liberal gun owners, the undecideds, etc. There aren't enough people like us to get anything passed on our own, we need a coalition to make things happen and that means avoiding stoking partisan tensions where we don't have to and giving them a reason to join with us.

When someone tries to strip you of your rights, the response is not to engage them in dialogue. The price of disarming the population will be a red ocean. The key is to make that very, very clear, so no one gets any funny ideas.

Nobody's pretending there's any equality here, but treating it as a partisan issue gives them cover regardless.

The disparity makes it a partisan issue.

banuser
RECIPR0C1TY
User: SovereignLover
Duration: 7 days
Description: Advocating Violence
approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw

I'm not wrong

I guess the gloves are a bit quick to come off when a semi-overt Communist shows up and tells me that Capitalism's days are numbered. I'm not wrong about what I posted above but for the sake of adhering to the rules of civil discourse I will edit the comment above.

approvelink
Wanzer-Reznaw
New York Times chief outlines coverage shift: From Trump-Russia to Trump racism

[contents unavailable]

approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw
  • /u/biglybaggins said, waiting with baited breath hoping someone would take the obvious bait and begin a flame war.
approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw

Fair enough. But you also can’t say that Democrats are anything but racist

distinguish
Wanzer-Reznaw

~1b. Associative Law of Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. (i.e.) Republicans/Democrats are idiots. Attack Content, not Character.

approvecomment
Wanzer-Reznaw

I mean it's one thing to hate your president for whatever bullshit reason. But to just state flat out lies? Come on man. I know that's what most democrats do....but damnnnnnnnn.

What's next? The sun is black and the sky is green?

distinguish
Wanzer-Reznaw

Law 1b. Associative Law of Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. (i.e.) Republicans/Democrats are idiots. Attack Content, not Character.

"But to just state flat out lies? Come on man. I know that's what most democrats do....but damnnnnnnnn."

Offer proof that the economy is doing better, counter the argument or ask for more clarity. Do not engage in character attacks either on the individual or an associated group.

approvecomment
ubmt1861

Um Birtherism is racist, objectively.

No other excuse for it.

approvecomment
ubmt1861

I see it this way. Trump is, y'know, obviously pushing racist rhetoric and ideology.

If you don't support that, don't vote for him.

If you really like his economic policies, but don't like his racist rhetoric, well, don't vote for him anyway. Isn't the foundational idea of America that "All men are created equal" the most important thing to protect?

The economy does pretty well under both Republican and Democratic presidents, because we have a good setup here. Voting on economic policies won't make the hugest difference in your quality of life. But voting to keep a guy who racebaits is going to hurt a lot of people.

Just vote for a different Republican, man. Vote for a Libertarian. Just don't vote for the guy who's really aggressively contrary to America's ideals.

approvelink
ubmt1861
Trump nominates judge who argued countries are stronger if everyone is same ethnic group

[contents unavailable]