/baw/ - General Discussion

Can we please all act like grown-ups and have a civilized discussion about politics and the news this time around?

>>405827
Remember: if you need to insult the poster, your argument is invalid. Calm the fuck down.

>>405827
>>405828
You got your answer.

Serious political discussion on imageboard does not exist. Political shitposting though, does.

What states are up for Bernie next?

https://www.paypal.com/stories/us/paypal-withdraws-plan-for-charlotte-expansion

And this is what my home state gets for enacting a law that endorses anti-LGBT discrimination and takes away anti-discrimination rights from LGBT people who lived in cities that already had them.

Fuck Pat McCrory and the state legislature for rushing that bill into law. They deserve to see this state get a reputation as bigoted and discriminatory—and all the consequences thereof.

What the hell, did you just delete my comment?

>>405840

As for as the democratic races go, today is Wisconsin with 86 delegates. Saturday will be Wyoming with 14 delegates. And on the 19th we'll have the big 247 delegate race, New York. The 26th of April is also a race to pay attention to as it'll have Conneticut, Delaware, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania,for a combined total of 384 Delegates.

According to 270towin.com, this is how the polling averages out:
Wisconsin - Sanders 47.7%, Clinton 45.3%
Wyoming - No polls available.
New York - Clinton 58.3%, Sanders 35.5%
Conneticut - Clinton 50%, Sanders 31 %
Delaware - No polls available
Maryland - Clinton 61%, Sanders 28%
Rhode Island - No polls available
Pennsylvania - Clinton 54%, Sanders 30.5%

Of course, polling isn't very accurate, as Clinton lead Sanders handily in most polls in states where he won (particularly egregious would be the Minnesota polls that put Clinton way out in the lead, 59% to 25%, and yet Bernie snatched up many of the delegates from actual voters, 46 vs Clinton's 31). That's why so many people say "polls don't matter" but they are the only numbers that are available until the actual votes come in.

>>405846
I never saw it, but it could either be a glitch or the janitors are starting to clean up this thread. Did you deserve it?

>>405849
No I repeated the sentiment of the first to replies.

>>405852
in what words

repost your comment

>>405853
I can't even remember it now, I think I was telling stone to practice what he preaches. What the fuck +4?

>>405858
>personal attack on a namefag
>"repeated the sentiment" of telling people not to
You deserved it. Stop complaining.

>>405859
Telling someone to "practice what they preach" is hardly worthy of a deletion, certainly not compared to some of the other shit that gets thrown around here. If it got deleted, that is.

That kind of stuff comes with the territory of being a namefag/tripfag. If his post was deleted, that seems like an abuse of power. His comment should have been left, and he should have been called out for just kind of not helping things get on a better track by whoever deleted it. I'm sure others would have told him to stop, too. These threads don't need that kind of policing.

That's a big if though.

>>405860
Either way, glitch or not, this is a politics and news thread. Complaints go elsewhere.

>>405862
(that said, I agree with you)

>>405860
>These threads don't need that kind of policing.
They super do.

Well, Trump didn't win Wisconsin, which means chances of a contested convention have increased dramatically. If that happens, We definitely won't see Trump as the Republican nominee. Whether he goes forward as an independent or not will be interesting. I can't see the Republican party nominating Cruz either, as choosing between Cruz or Trump has been likened to, by party leaders, to be like choosing between poison or being shot. We could see Kasich as the Repub nominee, which would be interesting as he is considerably more moderate and we don't know how either Democratic candidate stacks up against them.

Bernie did win Wisconsin so he continues to cut into Clinton's lead. There was also mention by him that if he manages to not win outright, but also prevents Clinton from winning outright, he thinks he can convince some of the Superdelegates to side with him. Democrats could end up having quite the spicy convention as well.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35979522

Communist France's war on free speech continues

>>405871
it occurs that we have people who likely actually believe as much, so I should clarify that yes I am kidding here

>>405871

Many nations have, and have had since the end of the war, laws against Holocaust denial and pro-Nazi speech. Its understandable, given the magnitude of the Holocaust and the fact that Holocaust denial started with the Nazis themselves trying to destroy their own records and continues to this day, despite many of the same parties themselves advocating further genocide.

The problem is that any limits on speech beyond "speech" that involves violence (cp, snuff and crush videos, threats of imminent violence by someone with the means to carry it out) is that the state will use the ability to limit to bolster its power. Sure, its nice that France goes after that connard Le Pen, but it also prosecutes people for advocating changes in drug law for "promoting drug use" (Charlie Hebdo has been fined for such) or saying "Je ne suis pas Charlie" in the wake of the attack to Charlie Hebdo's history of xenophobia, racism, and generally /b/-level fuckery, or booing Le Marsellaise at the France v. Algeria game.

Also:

>France
>remotely communist

mdr!

>>405873
see
>>405872

>>405868
Wisconsin much like Villanova winning the NCAA was a nothingburger. Cruz still needs upwards of 90 percent of the remaining delegates. Trump needs about half which he's still tracking at being able to accomplish.

So you've got about three more races if Trump doesn't win New York by 50 percent in which Cruz is mathematically eliminated from the race. At which time it turns to him defending why he wants a contested convention and being on the same page as the party elites. Maybe he'll bring out Fiorina to defend him on that one again as rumors swirl that the Enquirer story isn't over yet.

Also the more Cruz is in the spotlight the more the shine wears off his fake Bible Thumping Conservative bullshit and he's revealed to be just another Beltway Elitist with all their animosity between him and others being nothing but a stage show.

Kasich is just a party wonk RINO that thinks he'll get the nod if he can get their dreams of a contested convention pulled off.

Which won't happen and then they'll give it Mitt or Ryan and allow Hillary to walk her way to the White House with no contest

Either looking at the Republican party transformation by a Populist leader. Or its utter destruction to thwart that and the will of its base.

>>405864
They super don't. There was a lot of awful garbage spewed in the last thread and I get that no one wants that to happen again, but deleting posts in that manner is not the answer. A moderator, at that point, should have come in and told them to cut it out and stay on topic of it's that bad. If it was a janitor, which is possible, they are severly stepping over their bounds. From what I remember, janitors were enlisted purely to deal with the spam the site was being bombarded with, not to moderate the site. If a moderator was the one who did it, that's even worse.

Outright deleting posts without an explanation doesn't tell anyone anything. There's no way for other posters to know what they did wrong, if they even did anything wrong. If we're going down the road where posts that are as benign as what that anon is claiming it was are deleted because they might hurt someone's feelings, and people here defend it and accept it, then I want off this ride. This place would be no better than Reddit at that point.

To reiterate, the manner this may have been dealt with is incredibly poor and a huge red flag to me, and defending something like that is a huge mistake, in my opinion. This still depends on whether the post was actually deleted, but my point stands.

I know this is off-topic, but I can't let a post like that go uncontested.

>>405876
Current betting odds say that a Contested Convention is all but certain right now. Fivethirtyeight agrees.

This is three of my comments you've deleted. Why are you specifically targeting me right now?

>>405878
And others have already payed out months ago that its going to be Trump that gets the nomination. He's already assembling a team to deal with a contested possibility.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article70202867.html

Would serve both parties to go the populist route. They wont but that is their own detriment. But the way the want things they are looking to make elections a moot point heading towards that inane NAU plan.

http://www.wyff4.com/news/senator-introduces-lgbt-public-bathroom-bill-that-mirrors-north-carolina-law/38897512

Oh look, my state is helping other states try to enact bigoted pro-LGBT-discrimination laws. And the SC senator isn’t even trying to hide his animus.

>>405881
Contact Autonymoose. I'm sure he's be fine clearing this all up, he's a pretty chill guy. I don't know if there's a more appropriate way to get in touch with him, but he's frequently on Steam and I think the IRC still exists, though I don't remember the info for it. I'd really like to know myself if your posts are being deleted, and if so why.

Look, I’ll be clear here: yes, I deleted posts from this thread that were nothing but insulting towards other posters. I’m not a moderator, but how often do we even need moderation around here, all things considered? The politics threads are the only threads on plus4 (outside of /pco/) that could stand to benefit from a bare minimum of moderation—even if it’s only a janitor deleting posts that have nothing to do with political discussion and everything to do with trying to provoke people into the Internet equivalent of a playground slapfight.

Lord knows I ain’t perfect. I’ve done my fair share of obnoxious shitposting. I’ll own up to that, regardless of what it does to my credibility. But the politics thread before this one was more insults and shitflinging than actual discussion of the news and politics. I like discussing politics with this board, God help me, because a good number of you actually keep me on my toes. You help me be less of a fucking imbecile about this stuff and help me better define my own positions on issues that I care about.

Did I delete those posts so this board could have a politics thread or two that isn’t on the level of /pol/’s shitflinging? Yes sir, yes I did. Did I overstep my boundaries? Maybe. Do I regret doing what I did? Not for a minute—not even if it costs me the tiny little bit of “moderation” power I have around here. Now can we please get back to discussing politics/the news like calm, semi-civilized people?

>>405888
I assume you'll be deleting all of the harassment that follows me around as well--not just when it's directed at you--yes?

>>405889

I deleted posts that insulted Mister Twister, so…yeah, if a post is made just to insult you and not provide anything of merit vis-á-vis political discussion, I’ll delete it.

>>405890
Dude, I am a-okay with people insulting me on the Internet.

>>405890
I don't have a problem with moderation as long as there's no favorites-playing. You're not exactly the first person I'd choose as a neutral party, but as long as you manage to not let your friends throw deaths in my (or anyone else's) face, or encourage suicide, or anything to that effect, no complaints.

>>405888
>Did I overstep my boundaries? Maybe.
There wasn't a boundary before; I will make one now, posting it here for transparency or whatever: Staff are not allowed to remove posts from threads they are actively participating in (excepting CP and "pure" spam) to avoid conflict of interests. They can report it up the chain or just use the reporting system for someone else to look at later.

>>405890
>Moderation should be done anonymously where possible

>>405888
You are un-fucking-believable. I am at a loss for words.

And you're actually trying to pretend what you did may not have completely over the line. You took a situation that could have been easily dealt with and made it worse, and then continued to make even worse by deleting more of his posts. And now you want to have swept under the rug so casually while trying to take the moral high ground.

What you did was foolish and cowardly. I have never had such a low opinion of you.

>>405895

Message received; won’t (actively try to) fuck up again, boss.

>>405888
>that were nothing but insulting towards other posters
And we have only your word for this. Your word which by the way means nothing, because:
>I deleted posts from this thread that were nothing but insulting towards other posters
This is coming from a guy who regularly calls people "hobos" and is the worst shitposter in politics threads.

>Lord knows
>God help me
You sound like a republican senator after videos were leaked of him in a gay fetish nightclub.

>Did I delete those posts so this board could have a politics thread or two that isn’t on the level of /pol/’s shitflinging? Yes sir, yes I did. Did I overstep my boundaries? Maybe. Do I regret doing what I did? Not for a minute—not even if it costs me the tiny little bit of “moderation” power I have around here. Now can we please get back to discussing politics/the news like calm, semi-civilized people?
Do you think you are a cartoon character? Sounds like the guiltiest monologue ever written for a cheap comic book.

You aren't our dark knight Stone.

Comment is copypasted, I will be reposting this for as many times as you delete it, so if you want to silence me you will have to work for it.

>>405903
>is the worst shitposter in politics threads
No, that's still you.

>>405824
I don't disagree.

>>405914
No, that would be the guy who brought up someone's dead friend to make an attack on their character. You can't compete with that kind of shitposting. There was also the anon who made that long rant about why they don't like that same person. And then there were all those anons who made claims of people being MRAs and rape apologists when people disagreed with them.

>>405917
well you don't seem partisan at all

OH HAI TALKING ABOUT POLITICS IN THE FUCKING POLITICS THREAD

>>405871
>Bernie did win Wisconsin so he continues to cut into Clinton's lead. There was also mention by him that if he manages to not win outright, but also prevents Clinton from winning outright, he thinks he can convince some of the Superdelegates to side with him. Democrats could end up having quite the spicy convention as well.

Possible, but unlikely - Wisconsin was always going to be Sanders-friendly territory, his 538.com target for this primary was 48 delegates and he pretty much bullseyed that, no more and no less. The problem is that he went in 80 delegates short of his overall campaign target and came out just as short. He doesn't need to just hit his targets, he needs to vastly exceed them to make up for the deficit he racked up earlier in the contest.

Now don't get me wrong, he has been overperforming in all the caucuses since Mega Tuesday, but the last of those caucuses in on Saturday and the only overperformance that's made an appreciable dent in his shortfall was from Washington state. He may well carry the momentum from these small-state victories into the delegate-rich primaries coming later this month, but he hasn't been able to before now and I haven't seen anything in the contest to suggest that this pattern is going to change.

Seth Rogen's "A Closer Look" has filled the John Stewart-shaped hole in my heart.

//youtube.com/watch?v=fHxSfs7GfdY

>>405925

Dammit, I mean Seth Meyers, and I can't delete and repost.

>>405926
Oh darn it! If only there was someone who could delete posts, a hero of some sort.

>>405927
Gave me a giggle.

This made me sad

//youtube.com/watch?v=Ylomy1Aw9Hk

>>405942
>4 hours a day
>FOUR HOURS A DAY ON THE PHONE
>F.O.U.R. H.O.U.R.S.
Dude fuck off I do call based fundraising eight hours a day as an intern for law enforcement in city hall. This is called a job, money SURPRISINGLY doesn't grow on trees.

Time spent on fundraising is probably the easiest introduction into public speaking for a congressperson, and is likely to be the most useful time they will ever spend in their entire political career.

John Oliver is a fucking retard.

>>405943

I'm not entirely sure why you're so upset. Your job is fundraising so you spend most of your time fundraising. A legislator's job, however, should be more geared towards tasks that would help them become a better legislator rather than a better fundraiser. This is taxpayer money going to pay a legislator to raise more money from wealthy individuals. The video even points out how it skews what sort of constituents these legislators end up hearing from the most. And frankly those conditions they are doing fundraising from are deplorable, I don't see how you could possibly defend them. Even if you have worked in worse conditions as a fundraiser, you shouldn't WANT to work in those kind of conditions.

>>405945
>A legislator's job, however, should be
Let me stop you right there, you don't have the power to decide what a legislators job "should be", their job is dictated by the needs of their party and their electorate. And it turns out new legislators do more good for their party and constituency fundraising.

I'm sick of people whinging about things that are fucking non issues. If you're actually interested in helping working class people (we both know you're not) and improving working conditions, start with helping people who work at call centers not people getting paid six fucking figures to do the same job.

I would fundraise from the inside of your anus for six figures.

>>405946
>#Trump2016

>>405949
And the point of my statement is that a run-of-the mill cubicle block is not the inside of your anus.

>>405946
>And it turns out new legislators do more good for their party and constituency fundraising.
How does it benefit me as a member of the public for legislators to be spending their time in this way?

>>405961
It benefits you if you want your party to win, your senators to know how to speak to people and have the connections needed to make actual change happen.

A freshly elected legislator has no idea which companies and investors to talk to to bring jobs to your state, and the best way they could help their party (and you) is to raise funds for the party and make those connections.

If you want your party to lose or to have people with strong opinions but no way to make things happen, then you might be a British national who doesn't understand democratic republics.

>>405962

Except you have retiring senators like Tom Harkin say that the reason why Congress doesn't work as well nowadays is because they have to spend more time fundraising than ever before. So perhaps instead of thinking of things in a binary state we should consider the idea that, while serving a networking function for young legislators, fundraising shouldn't dominate 4 hours every day of a a congressperson's job. This could be achieved by putting stricter regulations on political campaign money.

>>405962
>then you might be a British national who doesn't understand democratic republics

We Brits "understand democracy" just fine. The hell do you think our MPs do with their time?

>>405977

Watch endless reruns of Doctor Who?

>>405979
I fail to see what relevance the head of state being a ceremonial monarch or executive president has to the duties and responsibilities of elected representatives during working hours.

I canvassed for my MP loads of times last year, and as far as I'm aware (outside of the general election campaign) they save the canvassing and phonebanking for the weekends. During the working week they are either attending debates in Parliament, holding constituency surgeries or drafting legislation.

>>405962
>If you want your party to lose or to have people with strong opinions but no way to make things happen, then you might be a British national who doesn't understand democratic republics.
No, I'm a Pennsylvanian. And I don't see it as the state's job to bring in jobs, or use its incumbency to promote the party. It's my job to bring in jobs by creating businesses, and my job to inform myself through research and those around me through conversation. I'm registered as independent anyway, despite that excluding me from primaries.

>>405979
>Which is marvelously ignorant considering the purpose of congress isn't to pass a large number of laws, but to block a large number of shit laws and pass a small number of high quality laws.
Which is why I want congress to spend its time researching why proposed laws might actually be shit.

>That's by far the least important word in that phrase and you completely ignored the most important word - republic.
And you're the one calling me British?

So do you have a point or are you just trying to set some bait for something

Is this a satisfactory solution to the abortion question for feminists?

>A Russian MP representing populist nationalist party LDPR had drafted a bill under which women who refuse to have an abortion and give their newborn baby to the state would receive one-time monetary compensation of about $3,700.
https://www.rt.com/politics/338926-nationalists-suggest-state-buys-out/

She can still refuse and abort, or give birth in exchange for sweet cash. Either way she is 100% in charge of her body, and it's 100% her choice.

>>405991
If the option to get an abortion is still in the woman's hands, sure. If this is a backdoor into making abortion illegal "we have better alternatives (and therefore don't have to observe people's bodily sovereignity)," then no.

But what does "give their baby to the state" mean?

>>405986
>You seem to have really skewed views of what a MP actually does, they only sit for 140 days of the year, giving them 250 or so days off
They're not "days off" - in addition to attending debates, I said MPs also "hold constituency surgeries and draft legislation". The image you posted was of one of the Friday debates when a handful of bittereinders debate matters close to their hearts while the rest of the MPs head back to their constituencies and listen to problems their constituents have. The rest of the time they're not in parliament, they're either going over the minutiae of bills they're hoping to present or - in the case of ministers - governing. I've watched parliamentary debates in person, I regularly meet my MP at the local party office, I think I'd know what they do with their time.

I'm just baffled by this implication that I, Part-Time Party Hack, cannot comment on what elected politicians are supposed to do with their time (despite being on first-name terms with several of them) by virtue of my nationality. If you were only referring to John Oliver then say "John Oliver", no need to drag the rest of us limeys into this weirdly contrarian argument that your taxpayer-funded representatives spending much of their working lives at the corporate begging bowl is either healthy or intrinsic to the American system of government.

>>405991
I don't really know why you're targeting abortions now but anyway

It's a huge waste of taxpayers money and an obvious attempt by LDPR to massage Russia's growth rate, even though the problem with the growth rate is Russia's absurd death rate for an ostensibly developed country, not the birth rate.

I thought I posted this already but I guess plus4 ate that post, oh well

>>405991
I'm not a feminist but I'm fine with it, as long as the kids are put up for adoption instead of having metal tentacles grafted into their spine.

The cheapest and best solution would be to:
A) Stop all public funds that directly or indirectly support abortion, since only 36% of the taxpayers actually want that.
B) Have churches and the like personally collect donation money to buy off the kids if they care that much, instead of putting the tax burden on others.

>>405995
>obvious attempt by LDPR to massage Russia's growth rate
Every Western country has these incentives, usually in terms of tax and financial (banking institution) advantages for being married, retirement accounts, inheritances, health insurance and so on.

UK has the married couples allowance for example, which is every year for the rest of their marriage instead of a one time lump sum.

>>405997
>Every Western country has these incentives, usually in terms of tax and financial (banking institution) advantages for being married, retirement accounts, inheritances, health insurance and so on.
>
>UK has the married couples allowance for example, which is every year for the rest of their marriage instead of a one time lump sum.
Yes, and most of these don't have a negative growth rate brought on by rampant alcoholism and whatnot. This is a right wing solution to make a small part of Russia's image look better without actually confronting anything genuinely wrong with Russian society, while simultaneously opening the aforementioned backdoor to removing abortion rights.

>>406000
What racist trolling, the alcoholism? That's not racism you dipshit, Moscow has been recognizing it as an issue since the USSR, it's part of what jacks Russia's suicide rate so high, to say nothing of the general health effects.

>>406002
>ahurrrr russian population declining because theyre drunk!
That was not a thing that was ever said by anyone, or rather, not exclusively.
>>406002
>You wouldn't have to clutch straws and desperately try to lump that in with alcholism
There's no trying, suicide rates have been repeatedly linked across the world with alcoholism, and yes, Russia has a historical problem with that because life in Russia fucking sucks and cheap alcohol is often the only escape the undlerclasses have had. This is a problem recognized by numerous successive Russian administrations, but very little has ever been done to correct either the underlying social issues this reflects nor to properly enforce the actual limitations on the substance issue itself.

Furthermore, it was never implied that alcoholism was the sole cause of Russia's population problem. In fact quite the opposite, it was stated as an issue that fed into Russia's excessive death rate (their birth rate having already been stated to not be the problem).

Let's set aside any notion that you actually care about Russia and get to the real issue, if we can: why have you decided that abortion rights are now your pet issue? Have we ever even really talked about abortion rights in these threads? Isn't your thing more about removing laws against hate speech and such because you think their restricting your right to be a shit?

>>406005
>set aside any notion that you actually care about Russia
Says the fucking racist. Do you have a single fact you want to discuss, or are you just going to be a bigot this entire thread?

>>406008
>Says the fucking racist
You have never cared about racism in your life.

>>406009
Get the fuck out.

>>406017
No, this is your task, young /pol/-kun. Go, go and be free.

lol European Union is scared as fuck, they're spending hundreds of millions of euros on a troll army to combat "euroskepticism" in online forums, and are coming out with weird ass propaganda as well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

Yeah weird how the government of the UK is putting out a pamphlet on the current government policy

>>406019
Your bigotry is unwanted here.

>>406027
That misogynist was going to go down for battery and go down with Trump's hate-ridden campaign. Lewandowski being charged proves he's guilty, and the charges being dropped just proves that the system is set up against women and their oppresors go unpunished.

>>406032
>That misogynist was going to go down for battery and go down with Trump's hate-ridden campaign. Lewandowski being charged proves he's guilty, and the charges being dropped just proves that the system is set up against women and their oppresors go unpunished.
Well yes, that's correct.

who could have imagined that the /pol/ crew would take up such a position, I for one am shocked

>>406041
why are you greentexting yourself

>>406042
Actually that's not me.

PBS Crash Course is pretty good.

//youtube.com/watch?v=mWwXmH-n5Bo

>>406058
It's right for about a third of the video, then it slowly devolves.

Highbrow version:
//youtube.com/watch?v=P1r-r6iLBEI
//youtube.com/watch?v=7DS0XXFdyfI
//youtube.com/watch?v=NUtY80fv56M

Unibrow version:
//youtube.com/watch?v=s6rwplDNq1I
//youtube.com/watch?v=ffHS6sthF7M
//youtube.com/watch?v=Fuk1Oih8ZME
//youtube.com/watch?v=3l9B0gLUyz4
//youtube.com/watch?v=kH1WaHzvFkw
//youtube.com/watch?v=KAQr5Qrh4xQ
//youtube.com/watch?v=ESyOQPz4QyM
//youtube.com/watch?v=KENaWXPmBr0
//youtube.com/watch?v=KF_PtcgGYMY
//youtube.com/watch?v=7a9mrzgYT5Y
//youtube.com/watch?v=UEwnmyUsJaQ
//youtube.com/watch?v=5EoetIL-MiM
//youtube.com/watch?v=kJR0DYs70f8
//youtube.com/watch?v=qvB_1N-xvbM
//youtube.com/watch?v=OWximmaAuWw
//youtube.com/watch?v=bQFu85K2w88
//youtube.com/watch?v=FVJraZpGVrw
//youtube.com/watch?v=Jy5Bs_avaFo

Or just look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty#Results_and_aftermath
http://money.cnn.com/interactive/economy/minimum-wage-since-1938/

>>405888
You know, it's a funny thing. I consider myself Kinsey 6 homosexual. I have literally never felt physical attraction to a woman. When I was a baby, I nearly starved before my parents figured out they'd have to use a bottle because I wouldn't touch a breast. When I went to school, I literally was unable to see girls. Every day, I would go to class and look around and wonder who all the empty seats were for. I thought the other guys were crazy because they sometimes had arguments with thin air. When I went to high school, I joined the football AND swim teams so I could spend more time in the locker rooms. It wasn't really the nudity– I had porn– but the *smell* of the dicks that I was going for. That's why, in the Navy, I took laundry duty every chance I got. I fantasized about our instructor taking me in, adopting me, and having me as a live-in maid. Yet this post and the guy who made it it are somehow gayer than me.

>>406073

So I'm a Class 7 faggot?

Neat. What do I get? :D

>>406074
these hands

>>406074
24-man facial and probably aids.

>>406073
Are you implying that what Stone has done is completely natural and he did nothing wrong? Because there is literally nothing wrong with being a homosexual.

I currently take a stance of preffering the development of sidewalks in suburban areas to the lack thereof.

>>406094
yet another god damn SJW

>>406091
>And by the way to the erasure superhero Stone over here, why don't you delete the douchebag who questions my goddamn sexuality. I got all day.
1) I was the one who deleted them. The NSFW tag is not an invitation to dump dicks in your personal tirade.
2) I'm too lazy to read the thread, so what post are you referring to? If you don't want to wait for the ban to be up or cycle the modem, you can e-mail me.

>>406098
Based

>>406103
Let it stand as a matter of record, the SJW is celebrating getting a gay man banned. This is why no one likes you people.

>>406121

Grow a sense of humor.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-primary-voters-outraged-broken-machines-late-polls-article-1.2606810

I'm starting to believe conspiracy theorists.

>>406123
What? No! Don't read into what those conspiracy theorists are trying to sell you.
Monsters aren't secretly rigging/damaging voting machines in order to gain favor with the political factions that run this country. That's silly, stop being silly.

>>406122
Grow a sense of reality.

>>406123
>Republican strategist John Burnett, attempting to vote in the GOP primary, arrived at his polling place to discover they were out of ballots for his party.

>“After showing voter card, I signed book and (was) given a Democrat ballot,” tweeted Burnett. “I asked for GOP ballot, told no more and to wait.”

>It took two hours for somebody to provide him with a ballot to vote for a Republican presidential candidate.
Having separate ballots in the first place? What ballot do people use in NY when they aren't just going for a straight party ticket, if you can't vote for one part with the other's ballot?

>>406121
>getting a gay man banned
Buscemi-kun got himself shut down by moose as far as I can tell

>>406128
i cant believe autonymoose banned Steve Buscemi

>>406098
He asked for proof that I was gay, what am I supposed to do?

The exact purpose of the NSFW tag is to post NSFW things. The only objectionable part is there being a series of images, but are you honestly trying to claim five pictures constituted spam? Are five pictures in the screencap thread spam? Would it be ok if I put all my dick picks into one large image and NSFW that? You could have removed them and warned me, there was no reason to ban.

>I'm too lazy to read the thread
And this is why you're a bad mod, you're missing the context. You're the teacher that pretends he didn't see billy put chewing gum in tommys hair because you just don't want to deal with it. Well fuck, just give your mod password to Stone if that's the plan.

I still can't figure out a reason other than blatant favoritism that you didn't take away janitor powers, ban or even speak harshly to Stone for deleting posts of people who disagreed with him. That wasn't spam, in any sense, he was just being a cunt.

>>406128
You're the one who accused me of not being gay.

You're the one who demanded I post proof.

So I did.

And you reported me for it.

Anonymoose is just the ambivalent tool you happened to use.

Now you're what, pretending the evidence was never posted?

Oh and celebrating hurting a gay person, this is why no one likes you SJWs, your "benevolence" only extends so far as minorities agree with you. The moment a minority disagrees with you, you start prepping the gas chambers.

>>406131
>He asked for proof that I was gay, what am I supposed to do?
Call him a faggot. Since when is proof needed on an imageboard?

>>406137
That's awful but I laughed

>>406131

>he was just being a cunt

I take offense to that. I was being a brainless dick like any other cisgendered white bisexual from the South, thank you very much.

>>406141
I feel attacked.

>>406142

Hey, I was called a cunt. How do you think I feel, being misgendered and all that?

>>406131
>You're the one who demanded I post proof.
Nobody asked for any such thing, actually.

>>406154
Yeah you did, you posted a buscemi picture holding a skateboard when you did it, that's where this >>406128 reference is from.

Aaaaand now you're lying about it.

>>406157
>you posted a buscemi picture holding a skateboard
/I/ posted no such thing. The person who DID post it didn't ask anything of you, they merely mocked you.

I am also mocking you.

>>406162
No, he didn't mock me, he said I wasn't gay and was only pretending or something.

Also considering they deleted their comment when I started posting proof, how do you know what he posted? Did you happen to chance by in the few minutes it was on?

>>406131
>He asked for proof that I was gay, what am I supposed to do?
Ignore it? This is not just the internet, but a horribly-rendered 4chan wannabe. Someone questioning your sexuality (or lack there of) is par for the course. chans require a thick skin.
>The exact purpose of the NSFW tag is to post NSFW things. The only objectionable part is there being a series of images, but are you honestly trying to claim five pictures constituted spam?
The NSFW tag is for providing examples on an otherwise-SFW board. Not dumps (with more leniency in a NSFW-topic thread). It was not just five images. Maybe another anon thought "I should take offense to someone questioning my sexuality and prove otherwise by spamming dicks", and I cleaned that up before the same idea popped into your mind and you got caught in the cross-fire. If so, my apologies.
>you're missing the context.
Hence why I requested it. I don't have time to read every thread on every board; I do a quick check for context that suggests I'm misunderstanding something, but it usually doesn't matter much. The spam would not be excused, but if someone was specifically trolling they might get a ban as well (but, again, *chans, thick skin, etc.)
>I still can't figure out a reason other than blatant favoritism that you didn't take away janitor powers, ban or even speak harshly to Stone for deleting posts of people who disagreed with him. That wasn't spam, in any sense, he was just being a cunt.
I believe everyone deserves a second chance (with rare exception.) He was being a cunt/brainless dick, which is why I outlined the moderation policy publicly, and he's stopped. It's the same reason the ban policy isn't "First offense: permanent site-wide ban".
>And you reported me for it.
No one reported you (I actually checked out of curiosity before deleting). I was already keeping an eye on the thread due to the first set of dick-spam.

I suggest you take a step back and cool off. Regardless, an individual's sexuality is fairly irrelevant to politics (again, context; again, I'm lazy), so everyone move on.

>And this is why you're a bad mod... Well fuck, just give your mod password to Stone if that's the plan.
>mod
3/8 keks

>checked out of curiosity
ggggggggggaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

>>406163
>No, he didn't mock me, he said I wasn't gay and was only pretending or something.
Yes, they were (I assume) mocking you for pretending to be gay for argument points.
>Also considering they deleted their comment when I started posting proof, how do you know what he posted? Did you happen to chance by in the few minutes it was on?
I saw it, yes.

Also you keep saying "proof" but you realize the only thing posting dicks proves is that you posted dicks, yes?

>>406170
And here he is again.

I'm going to follow this guys >>406135 advice and call you a faggot. Not to be confused with a gay person, just a straight guy that's a faggot.

Faggot.

With so many Syrian men either dead or mass emigrated to Europe, there must be a 3x surplus of women in Syria.

When the civil war is over I'm going to take a vacation there and drown in brown pussy.

>>406175
>When the civil war is over
Any day now, I'm sure

>>406175
Why don't you just invite female refugees like sly Canada did?

To that one anon in particular with a massive, ubiquitous hate-boner for Slowpoke:

wow

>>406193
Please don't start that again. I'm not you're wrong, but it's fuel to a flame everyone's tired of watching.

>>406193
Slowpoke is too moderate for some people.

Cruz got caught bribing a delegate on camera.

//youtube.com/watch?v=K-pwGx4vv2g

>>406200
Slowpoke isn't a moderate so that's not really the case.

>>406201
Handing slips of money out in the open, where you're always on camera, in a way that could easily lead to the money just falling out of your hand to be lost under the crowd's feet? And as a single bill it's at most, what, $500 anyway? This just doesn't sound like a practical method of bribery at all, so I'm prone to beleive Cruz's story that some kid handed him a five and he passed it on to a campaign manager. Though I suppose it could be a really dumb attempt at hiding in plain sight, or a ruse to draw attention away from less obvious activity.

>>406195
Alright, my bad. I just needed a quick vent.

>>406203
Let me guess, he's a sexist white supremacist.

>>406212

It’s essentially an expanded version of the thought process behind anti-trans “bathroom bills”: “We don’t want men dressing up as women and going into the women’s restroom!”

Never mind the fact that, in every state and city that has passed pro-trans non-discrimination ordinances, there are no reports of anyone exploiting those protections to commit assaults (sexual or otherwise). Or the fact that we already have laws to deal with those kinds of crimes. Or how nobody who argues for the anti-trans laws seems to have any idea about how to enforce or punish people for breaking such laws. Or how such laws would force trans men and women who have already transitioned into the bathroom of their birth sex and, thus, create situations where a trans man could be forced into the women's restroom and leave said trans man open to harassment (or worse). I mean, forget all those things, and all those “protect the children”-esque arguments in favor of anti-trans “bathroom bills” make complete sense.

>>406216
It's pretty ridiculous

>>406213
I mean he's certainly sexist. I can't say I've seen him express white supremacist views personally, though that he pointedly does not target the anti-Islamic posts in these threads is somewhat curious. inb4 someone tries to say "there are white muslims!" to sidestep the notion that there's no racial element to Islamophobia, though of course even if there weren't purely religious discrimination is hardly better

Doesn't seem to be transphobic either, which is rather surprising.

>>406212
>>406216
>>406217
I'm just glad no-one's really talking about that stuff here in my country yet.

Is the whole point of segregated bathrooms (male/female) for safety and/or anti-harassment reasons, or is it also for other reasons such as comfort?

Also as a side note, something came out on the news about some girl coming out as non-binary in a televised (discussion?) to Obama. Gender issues aside, she is being an attention whore. If we get similar scenarios, I fear people like that will stain the legitimate movement.

>>406222

>Is the whole point of segregated bathrooms (male/female) for safety and/or anti-harassment reasons, or is it also for other reasons such as comfort?

I’d assume it’s a bit of both. Then again, it’s not as if a “Men’s” or “Women’s” sign will actually stop someone from entering a gendered restroom if they really want to go in. It’s not a fucking force field, after all.

>>406222
>Also as a side note, something came out on the news about some girl coming out as non-binary in a televised (discussion?) to Obama. Gender issues aside, she is being an attention whore. If we get similar scenarios, I fear people like that will stain the legitimate movement.
Well you certainly seem on the up and up.

>>406223
Assuming there's no laws against entering the wrong bathroom (I don't know but I haven't found any), people are free to enter and use, but I guess there can be social ramifications. I've heard of people who have used the other bathroom due to an excessive line-up or broken facilities and they were fine.

If no-one sees you, you can go wherever you like.

>>406234
It's strange that you think anyone would care enough about Koala Island to even read those numbers.

>>406212
Come on the guy looks like Lurch from the Adams family, it's a strawman political cartoon for people who don't want to think why someone rational actually might be opposed to badly written laws purporting to "protect" transgender individuals.

Transgender people put effort into passing as their gender and can easily pass for their gender, there's no reason for these people to have laws specifically protecting them because no one can tell the difference anyway.

Simply strike down any law specifically against it, and on the off chance that a cis person gets triggered by a surprise penis there are already hate and assault laws if anyone wants to be an ass.

A law that specifically demands transgender access is seen as being there only to protect perverts who put on dresses to stare at little girls pee.

This is why people are against specific laws that push for transgender access. Not Lurch-like strawmen people, but women who feel unsafe. Women who feel unsafe are the only people really against unisex bathrooms as well. I assure you no man has ever went "oh god what if a girl sees me pee!"

tl;dr the carolina law should be struck down, but it's important to understand it only exists because of things like this: http://www.dailywire.com/news/5190/5-times-transgender-men-abused-women-and-children-amanda-prestigiacomo

>>406234
>if you see them being called "far right" just ignore it
or don't, since it's a thing that is true

also worth noting is that Australia and Austria are not the same country

>>406235
>A law that specifically demands transgender access is seen as being there only to protect perverts who put on dresses to stare at little girls pee.
yes, this is not a problem with the law so much as it is a problem with the kind of people the law exists to protect said trans people from

i.e you

>>406235

>A law that specifically demands transgender access is seen as being there only to protect perverts who put on dresses to stare at little girls pee.

And that's because hatemongers keep conflating “transgender people” with terms like “sexual predator”, “pedophile”, and “rapist”—and ignorant voters/lawmakers keep buying into the idea without thinking for a moment as to whether the comparisons are true. If anything, transgender people have more to fear from being forced into the restroom that coincides with their birth sex than cisgender people have to fear from trans people using the toilet.

If Bernie Sanders isn’t going to be president, what happens to the movement that coalesced behind him?

https://weeklysift.com/2016/04/25/beyond-bernie-2016/

>>406240
The 2008 primaries were a lot more bitter than this year's contest has been and Clinton still threw her full support behind Obama, so it shouldn't be impossible to arrange a tit-for-tat reconciliation between Clinton and Sanders. Sanders has won more than enough delegates to influence policy at the convention, which I imagine was the plan all along before victory fever set in, so I think he can stand by Clinton with his head held high.

It's his supporters I'm more worried about. Since New York the Sanders4Prez reddit has been an impenetrable brick wall of salt, mired in conspiracy theories about electoral fraud and "paid shills". Several sunk their life savings into this campaign, so bringing their campaign in line with a candidate they've hitherto regarded as "THE ENEMY" might be too much for some of them to stomach. Still, the "Clintonites for McCain" proved to be a desultory-to-non-existent factor in the 2008 election, so while there'll no doubt be a hardcore of "Berniebros for Trump" who'd go against their own candidate's wishes I don't imagine they'd make more than a ripple in the General.

>>406218
The racial breakdown for Islam is traditionally as follows.
Caucasian muslims: North Africa, Europe, Middle east, Central asia, South asia, Little asia.
East Asian muslims: Southeast asia, Central asia.
Sub-saharan African muslims: Sub saharan africa.

Those groups are heavily isolated. Caucasian muslims are in conflict with caucasian christians, African muslims are in conflict with African christians, and East Asian muslims are in conflict with East asian christians. There's almost no crossover.

Given this, I'm curious to know how you think there's a racial element.

>>406242
>2008 primaries were a lot more bitter than this year's contest has been and Clinton still threw her full support behind Obama
Hey yeah. Shit, does anyone remember Hillary starting the birther rumors? Hard to believe Obama took her in after that.

>Shit, does anyone remember Hillary starting the birther rumors?
This is the most amazingly desperate thing you've posted yet holy hell.

>>406251
You don't know about this? It was a clinton-supporter-with-no-ties-to-clinton, nudge nudge, wink wink type deal.

>>406253
No I was unaware that this was a thing you were seriously trying to pawn off, as it seems beyond the pale even for you.

>>406256
Is google a paid service where you live.

New Conspiracy Theory coming about. Trump is being backed by the native lizard people against the globalist following the extraterrestrial mandate that we must become a united world to be admitted into the galactic union.

>>406290
Yeah but we already know Hillary supporters are shit from this thread.

so are y'all prepping your "not MY president" speeches for when Hillary wins

>>406290
>Police on scene witnessed it so no bullshit.
lol.

>aus
>no idea who to vote for

>>406299
Katter

Berniebabies blown the fuck out.
//youtube.com/watch?v=hGeMX8RvRbc

>>406299
If you want to maintain western principles such as freedom of speech, security in property, equality under the law, procedural justice, democratic responsiveness to the citizenry, free markets, limits to government power and so on, vote for Folkes with the Australian Liberty Alliance.

If you don't like these things, just randomly vote for any other party.

>>406302
For non-Aus reference, "Liberty Alliance" is the the right wing anti-refugee crew

SJWs running out of things to complain about again.

Todays whine: Why? Oh why?! Why did twelve LGBTQ characters on TV have to die?!

//youtube.com/watch?v=nmSVj4q3QaE

>>406305

In fairness, it happens so often that it’s an actual trope on TV Tropes — http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuryYourGays

>>406293
She's got such a great platform and track record. How can she lose/sarc/

>>406307
she's going to get the democratic nomination and the republicans don't have the numbers, have fun

>>406306
There is a reason for this you know.

A loud minority of far left lunatics demand over-represenation far beyond 1% of gays in shows, and they demand of course that the gay person has to be stereotypically and blatantly gay.
Hollywood caves in, but obviously good writers rarely spend their time making stereotypically gay characters, so Hollywood has to shoehorn a highly political character into scripts it wasn't meant to be in.
The deaths then are the end result of having to remove a character that doesn't fit in with the rest of the script, so the show isn't ruined.

Gonna say this once and once only: Real gay people don't go around talking 24/7 about being gay. Gay characters look exactly like straight characters. Everyone concerned about something this stupid should just assume 1% of TV show characters are gay without the character having to break the 4th wall every ten seconds to remind them.

KP made a joke about it.
//youtube.com/watch?v=e3h6es6zh1c

>>406311
lol

>>406311

>A loud minority of far left lunatics demand over-represenation far beyond 1% of gays in shows, and they demand of course that the gay person has to be stereotypically and blatantly gay.

If anything, the people I’ve seen ask for better representation of LGBT people in TV/movies/etc. ask for the opposite: a gay character who is defined by more than their sexual orientation. (And that’s actually possible! It’s not a pipe dream!) But the issue with the Bury Your Gays trope is how it feels like a form of queerbating—in other words, a show like The 100 introduces a gay character and gets fans’ hopes up about that character having a happy ending and being important to the story beyond just being "the token gay", then kills said gay character for whatever reason.

>good writers rarely spend their time making stereotypically gay characters, so Hollywood has to shoehorn a highly political character into scripts it wasn't meant to be in

I didn’t realize a gay person’s mere existence had a political slant to it. Mind telling me, an actual bisexual, what political slant my existence has?

>The deaths then are the end result of having to remove a character that doesn't fit in with the rest of the script, so the show isn't ruined.

Seems to me that you’re against gay characters being allowed to be openly gay; your post makes it sound as if they have to “look exactly like straight characters” (i.e., act “straight”) or else they’re “political” and “shoehorned in”. And yes, having a gay character who isn’t a blatant stereotype or a political tool is all well and good—but for such characters to actually exist, they still have to, y’know, be gay. They can’t just exist in a vacuum devoid of sex, romance, and interpersonal relationships.

>>406317
lol

>>406317

IIRC, "Bury Your Gays" stemmed initially from Hayes Code era prohibitions of depicting any sexual immorality without punishment. So you could have a camp gay man (see: Nero in "The Sign of the Cross") as a villain or a predatory lesbian villainess (see: "Dracula's Daughter") and as long as they end up punished at the end, you're good. The same Code is why gangsters have to always die/get caught by the cops and lectured about their hubris, and why Cecile B. Demille can have naughty pagans cavort and frolic in drunken revels before Jehovah smites them.

Obviously, the Code is dead, but the same sort of attitudes that produced it (and were reinforced by it) linger on.

>>406326
lol

can we all at least agree that Anthony Burch's attempts at writing LGBT characters are the worst
because let me tell you, I'm down with some bisexual peeps on my dystopian Spaghetti Western BUT IN SPACE series, but boy howdy I do not appreciate his efforts

>>406328
>Anthony Burch
I don't know who this is or why you brought him up.

>>406330
Then why reply?

Also I think you're lying your ass off here for effect.

This is the information age knowing who he is can take literally seconds so you don't look like an ignorant idiot, and it's obvious he's bringing it up because that's one of the topics in this thread.

>>406337
Bringing up some random writer has no real relevance to the actual topic though. It's, at best, a tangent, and more likely a deflection.

>>406338
I wasn't even posting before then you bag of wrenches, what am I "deflecting"

>>406339
Criticism of the assorted vile viewpoints you defend, your usual routine.

>>406342
Except I wasn't defending anything.

I wasn't even posting.

>>406342
boo frickity hoo

>>406342

Shouldn't you be banned by now for constantly resorting to personal attacks?

>>406345
No, enough people rail on me that it has become acceptable to do so.

>>406346
you are the new Mister Twister

no offence

>>406347
None taken, it's basically the truth of it.
Enough people dislike a guy, it becomes difficult, or, usually, not worth it in the eyes of the mods, to enforce.
There were Mister Twisters before Mister Twister, there are and will continue to be Mister Twisters after Mister Twister.

>>406348
I sincerely feel for you, man.

Madness is a bitch.

Poke you are a vile human being, but I will grant at least that you are not MT.

You are, however, roughly equivalent to Toxie or Senor.

>>406358

I stopped deleting posts in this thread when Big Boss told me to. Don't blame me for your posts getting axed when I didn't do it. And for fuck's sake, y’all need to quit ripping on Slowpoke like it’s a national pasttime—if his views are toxic, you can address those without attacking him. This may be an imageboard, but do you really want it to just be 4chan with a different layout?

>>406351
I liked both of those people, so I'm fine with this.

>>406359
>you can address those without attacking him
This requires him to post in good faith, which neither he nor his cheer squad would ever do so

>>406362
Actually you're the only one posting in bad faith in every single of these threads, you have a very distinctive posting style.

For example accusing people of doing things they haven't done or being things they aren't despite everyone being able to check and prove you wrong, trying to guilt trip people without realizing that we're adults and stopped falling for that shit in highschool, and not shitposting with reaction images or one-liner replies.

We know slowpoke is not a vile person because he's never posted anything vile. The only way anyone could think this guy is vile is if they were disgusted by moderation and slightly boring (re: unemotional) reply patterns.

And honestly do you think Slowpoke will go "oh my god someone thinks im vile, quick better change my complete psychology and agree with them!"

This is stupid, stop trying to guilt the guy, you're not his mother or his girlfriend. And even if you were literally sucking his cock and trying to guilt trip him.. he's at least eighteen, he's immune to that bullshit and too old to change that way anyway.

>>406363
>We know slowpoke is not a vile person
"We" don't know anything of the sort, do not lump others into your weird anti-feminist crusade.

>>406367
I can certainly denounce that person. However, since Bernie is now essentially a dead duck Hillary Clinton remains the only remotely sane presidential candidate.

>>406366
>but im not american, its not any of my business
Then why post about it or keep your/Pol/ Screenshot Kit on hand?

It's almost like you have an agenda or something.

>>406370
>don't fucking pretend you supported bernie before hillary
I literally voted for him in the VA primary but okay

>>406384

>you were off the reservation, running on colored people time

…the fuck?

>>406385
don't try to apply rational thought to a /pol/ creature

>>406391

Being annoyed with someone ≠ having PTSD

>>406392
glad we agree ;)

>>406393
Slowpoke depends yet another piece of shit /pol/ user: world stunned

Oh lol /pol/kun tries to attack the Clinton's over infamously flimsy allegations, while praising Trump who has a straight up, solidly documented case, I love this thread

>>406394
I was actually making a lighthearted joke, poking fun at Tumblr teens misusing a word (yet commonly get defended for it despite it making people take mental illnesses less seriously).

jokes, guy

>>406396
>it making people take mental illnesses less seriouly
A: oh yeah cause this is totally a thing you care about
B: this is the problem of these mysterious and ephemeral "people" whom you are likely inventing, not tumblr users

>>406397
As a mentally ill man married to a mentally ill woman in a Religious Conservative part of the US where people routinely either don't understand or just openly mock mental illnesses, idiots giving them even more ammunition by faking mental illnesses for attention does in fact directly impact my life and the life of my significant other.

>>406395
>infamously flimsy allegations
>things she is on video saying
Hahahahah.

>/pol/-kun
You heard it here folks, if you don't like an abuser, a racist rape apologist for president, then that means you must be a stormfronter.

>>406397
>this is the problem of these mysterious and ephemeral "people" whom you are likely inventing
Mentally ill people are ephemoral?

>>406398
>idiots giving them even more ammunition by faking mental illnesses for attention does in fact directly impact my life and the life of my significant other
Good thing this isn't a thing in any of the areas about which we discuss in this thread. Care to comment on that dude denying that Islamophobia has no racial element? No? Of course not.

>>406401
It's a huge thing on tumblr, twitter and practically everywhere on the internet.

>Care to comment on that dude denying that Islamophobia has no racial element?
Care to comment how a religion has a racial element? You still haven't explained that, and you're not going to get away with just asserting it.

>>406399
>if you don't like an abuser, a racist rape apologist for president
Then you probably aren't voting Trump