Comment: You're comparing a site where

(See in situ)

You're comparing a site where

You're comparing a site where we just complain about people, and saying we're the same as a site that bans people outright. I find that fairly offensive generalizing us a collective. I've never called for any bans on anything, yet because of your phrasing I stand accused. If members are calling for banning, it's because they're sick of hearing about him. Johnson supporters should take a hint and wait till after the convention when we might actually be looking at other candidates. Right now, most of the members are still focused on Paul, and Johnson stuff gets annoying. The mods here haven't banned Gary Johnson supporters who haven't violated the rules, and if they ever started I think most of the people here would complain, because that would make us just like Redstate. The people who call for banning of any speech that isn't abusive clearly misunderstand the core meaning of liberty. They need to be educated, and calling them Redstaters isn't going to make the point you want to make. It makes some of the people who read this board and don't actually want to ban anything think "We're not like Redstate, is this another Johnson troll calling DPers names?" The best thing Johnson supporters can do is wait. Everybody here knows who he is, and most of the people who don't want to support him have policy disagreements, because he's not a philosophical libertarian. Pestering them to get behind him isn't working. It's having the opposite effect.