Not supposed to be, are.

If you want to criticize, then that's fine. You're allowed to do so. But your first post was a driveby offering nothing constructive. And that actually is a violation of rules regarding substance. It adds nothing, and it's part of our job to let you know not to do that. 

As for your criticism, I don't think Hiku has done anything that can be remotely classified as jumping down anyone's throat. I'm way more aggressive in calling stuff out, but I think I'm staying on the right side of the line, where I'm criticizing ideas and not people. I think that approach is sometimes warranted, and in this case is. Whether that is acceptable for a mod is a decision for the head mods and people who own the site.

I'm not saying any of you are wrong here, but just look at some of the replies here:

Runa216: "Damn! someone's righty salty!" (At the start of his reply)

JWein: " XD XD XD XD XD XD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

             (.....)

            When people criticize you for saying stupid shit, "WAAAAAAH! THEY'RE BEING INTOLERANT!" "

Pretty sure there are more examples, but I'm not going to hunt them all down.

I'm sorry if I'm being rude now, and some mods certainly "love" me for some of the takes I have every now and again, but I'm tired of every single political thread ending up like this. People calling names, or the moment you defend a politic viewpoint you are already dismissed(applies for both sides) without any kind of logical discussion happening, or that line of thought being dropped midway through the arguments.

Of course users here are far more civilized compared to other places, but still. It tires me. I guess I am bringing my own issues with political discussion I have/that are held around me in real life, but I still want this topic to be better handled. I know it's a lost cause, because politics actively affects how you are able to live your life, so people get more invested than they normally would and an opposite view in what you believe in can be seen as a threat to your life style, especially in a age where everything is so instantly affected due to the flow of information and technology(and with the US election just around the corner).

Still, I do try my best, even if I have to be a bit snarky about it. Heh, I do misbehave every now and then, and people call me out for that. So I'm doing the same for others.

But anyways, that was all I was going to add. Gonna leave you guys alone. For a while!

Well, Runa's comment was addressed towards me I believe, and I didn't take it as an insult. They were just pointing out that my tone was a bit harsher than it normally is. Which it was.

Which leads to my comment. I can discuss things rather patiently with conservative people. I had long conversations with slimebeast and EricHiggins about political correctness which stayed fairly respectful IMO despite them being two of the more conservative users on the site. But, there are certain things that deserve to be called out as harshly as our rules allow. For instance, the assertion that criticizing the President is "anti-democratic". Or that your opinions about liberals being hostile and generally terrible people is "objective" and that criticizing someone for saying that means they're being intolerant.

Some parts of this thread have been pretty calm cool and collected. Sometimes it gets heated. More than politics, I think that's just life. 

If you step into a room yelling "The Globalists are pushing their leftist agenda to enslave us and Trump is the only one who can save us", you probably haven't stepped into that room looking for an even keeled, fair minded debate about the value of liberal government. As such, no one should be shocked if the response is equally abrasive. Frankly, I'm shocked that several users decided to respond to that post fairly and honestly presenting sources and factual rebuttals instead of just pointing and laughing as was my knee jerk reaction...

I mean, the middle ground between literally any other political position and racism combined with voter supression should be somewhere around Reagan, right?

Trump 2020 is not Trump 2016, he's running on a conservative republican platform now, which is a snooze. Screaming "socialism" will get you nowhere. In 2016, Trump was the socialist when compared to Hillary, in fact, issue by issue, Trump was on the left to Hillary in most cases. Say what you want about his credibility, but his platform was engaging.

Anyway, wasn't it for COVID, I think Trump would've still had a chance as the economy was going strong, but the tides have turned, which is why not acting on most of his promises, especially better healthcare, was a mistake.

The only thing going for Trump these days is that he's against thugs and the trail of chaos they leave behind in the name of protesting police brutality. I think a sizeable silent voting base will choose Trump because they have no sympathy for losers who passed on countless chances to better their lives and now are acting out because they made bad choices their entire lives and want the rest to foot the bill. My money is still on Biden, nonetheless. 

I think you need to go back and look up what objective means.  What you are talking about is a subjective opinion, which you are certainly entitled to.  Presenting your opinion is an absolute fact though is what gets you in trouble.  

Here is the thing, from what I can see, you seem to get all your opinions and information from conservative sources.  A lot of people in this thread only get their information from liberal sources.  You will never get a full picture or understanding of something if you only hear half the story.  You have to look at both sides if you want to form a valid opinion.  

I am only here to underline this incredible truth!

Moren, leftist. Righty.

This is the problem with this partisanship. Moren is far from a leftist (as his many conflicts with actual leftist users in this forum show), but that doesn't mean he can't have an opinion I agree with. There is no left or right, there are people with a collection of political opinions. Sometimes these opinions overlap, sometimes not. Putting everything into this black-white (or more correctly red-blue) view, does horrendous damage to the political process.

Why not have both? Some of the east-asian countries and New Zealand and Australia have considerably better results in fighting the epidemic than the rest of the world. Massive differences. And apparently these countries also have not as much of an economic impact. This means you can both fight the epidemic and save the economy. It is not a contradiction.