Despite your fixation on it, it in no way invalidates my point. It was one sentence that's acknowledged in the edit, and I openly acknowledge it as "ignorance" further down. What would you prefer I replace the text of "Edit #1" with?
> Yes, Reddit is not friendly to social conservatives but that is really the only bias you've presented.
Thank you for partially agreeing, but you are illustrating your ignorance and seem "only interested in attempting to misrepresent the facts to fit [your] world view." Specifically, you are ignorant to the fact that libertarian monetary policies are not interchangeable or equivalent to conservative monetary policies. Just one example is that libertarians are isolationists, while conservatives tend to be interventionists. You also seem completely ignorant to the fact that libertarians are neither liberal, nor conservative, but in fact libertarian, though from your POV (and those on Reddit I would suspect), libertarians probably are what you consider "conservative."
> https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/top/?sort=top&t=month
That's the link I intended ("top posts from the past month"). If you were not so blinded with bias, you would recognize that your link proves my point and illustrates that you are "only interested in attempting to misrepresent the facts to fit [your] world view."
> its really hard to be nice to someone
Really? I have no difficulty politely discussing the issue with you despite your clear ignorance, anti-conservative bigotry, myopathy and that you are wrong and misrepresent all the facts I am presenting. I have said nothing negative about liberalism at any point.
> 1) You make conservatives look bad by being this ignorant.
You make liberals look bad by being this ignorant, and arguably worse through your tone and difficulty with not demonizing me.
> 2) You are painting me as a "hostile liberal" when my problem with you is the fact you have a fact-free opinion of the world and actively misrepresent and completely rewrite your posts to remove those misrepresentations?
You are clearly hostile and liberal. You are having difficulty being nice and instead of focusing on the topic, go on to mischaracterize me as "Un-American," "horrible American," "opposed to [the 1st Ammendment]," dishonest and opposed to honest public political discussion, which is self-evidently false as I am presently engaging in one. I did provide a fact, I'm sorry you are ignoring it. The facts in the link as discussed stand.
> and completely rewrite your posts to remove those misrepresentations?
Again, ignoring the facts. See "EDIT #1: Okay, /r/politics is a US-only forum. Supporting facts updated." and above, "What would you prefer I replace the text of "Edit #1" with?" I will however assume this is not due to some reading comprehension on your part and instead fault your myopathy or hostility.
> Populist rhetoric isn't inherently "subversive". The fact you are convinced that Reddit is an avenue for "anti-US political rhetoric" means you frankly don't understand the value and purpose of the 1st amendment.
Lol, geez man. Did I say any of that? I sound pretty terrible when you discuss me. I said, within the context of US-elections, a global opinion site could be an avenue for subversive rhetoric masquerading as something else. I love how you rail on me for misrepresenting things in ignorance, yet you have a literal mischaracterizing misquote: "anti-US political rhetoric". You seem to pervasively disregard the facts to support your opinion. I said "anti-US political subversion", and if you don't think that exists, then you don't understand politics or power. I'd be happy to recommend some reading if you need education.
> The fact you would go against that makes you [...] Un-American [,...] opposed to people exercising a fundamental constitution right [,...] a horrible American [,...] think the ability to have an honest, public conservation about political views is a bad thing
Wow. Alright, enough, you've gone off the rails. You're no longer discussing the topic and just flat out doing everything you can to mischaracterize me by attacking my character. Thank you for proving my point in absolutely every way.
While it's possible your intentions are honest, you are clearly misguided and are ignorant of both the facts and from your demeanor, probably malicious.