Is /pol/ a Republican board or a conservative board?
Cancer
lurk more
Kanker
>>74777840
Nationalist.
>>74777840
/pol/ is a Trump board.
>>74777840
republican board who pretends to be alt-right.
Absolutely NO ROADS board
>>74778115
>>74777840
Neither, retard.
The leader of the GOP is a nationalist. The party is currently being reformed into something worth a shit. I'm not ashamed to be a registered Republican for the first time in my life.
/pol/ has also been a hard right-wing leaning board
People who say it has ever been Libertarian are liars, while there are some here that believe in libertarians /pol/ is smart enough to realize they will never succeed.
Basically, /pol/ supports whoever they find the most radically right-wing
>>74778115
/pol/ is a National Socialist board.
>>74777840
>>74778110
>>74778536
fucking retards
i hope the elections end ASAP
>>74778781
fuck off gypsy.
>>74777840
It's a Alt-Right wing board with cringe-tier beliefs
>>74778930
>60%
>>74778536
>/pol/ was never libertarian
Ron Paul was a fucking god here in 2012. After the stormweenie invasion was when /pol/ took a hard right.
>>74779729
>Ron Paul
>even remotely left
>>74779729
Ron Paul was more right wing than anyone else. /pol/ was libertarian because of their racism, not libertarian because of weed and NSA shit.
>>74779968
>libertarian
>left
>>74779729
Ron Paul was the most conservative candidate running in 2012 you immense faggot. Hell, Obama was damn near more conservative than Romney was.
So back in 2012, the thought was that Ron Paul might be the most right-leaning candidate we could get. That's a vote for conservatism not for faggoty libertarianism. Hell, Paul denounced his own party and went Republican.
>>74779968
No shit. I never implied RP was even slightly left.
>>74780003
I think in large the sentiment here during the 2012 election was anti-establishment. That sentiment still remains in this election but it's taken on a nationalist/populist flavor.
>>74779277
>0%
NAZIONALISMUS ÜBER ALLES KAMARADEN
>>74780461
>Ron Paul was a god
>then /pol/ took a hard right
You have to be left before you can turn right
>>74778115
>>74780631
I should have clarified, this place is far more socially traditionalist/authoritarian than it was in 2012.
>>74777840
i'd say /pol/ is a board so hot it's feeling the bern, it's melting the arctic and it's saving jews from the holocaust
>>74781238
Authoritarianism is a reaction to having little faith in humanity.
>>74777840
>/pol/
>republican
>conservative
Pick one of the three and only one.
>>74781468
OW the EDGE
>>74781468
In 2012 we supported the candidate who was going to turn things around, in 2016 we support the candidate who is going to burn the system to the ground. So I'd agree with your statement.
>>74779729
>Ron Paul
>libertarian
Another fucking retard who can't tell the difference between a libertarian and a paleocon. He only endorsed the Constitution Party (a palecon party) candidate after he failed in getting the nomination.
>>74777840
/pol/ is a sample of the world's poulation.
The people that shout the loudest, are the dumbest. (yes, intentional)
Most people here blindly believe everything you tell them, and won't fact check. (I've been here two years, after graduating from other boards)
Original thought isn't welcome here, unless you have enough research to BTFO the idjits.
Lots of great people here, but it's hard to pick the few gems out of the shitpiles.
ANY Hillary thread, is a 'correct the record' thread because she is despised by the user base for her corrupt past and present.
/pol/ isn't one person, or a hugbox. I disagree with most people here, but find some amazing revelations through discourse.
no opinion is safe
no religion is welcome
no political party rules
Obligatory, fuck you all if you disagree.
>>74781987
Ron Paul blurred the line between libertarian and paleoconservative. Fuck off faggot.
>>74783084
It's a common mistake many idiots like you make. Calling him a flat out libertarian like you did is just wrong and makes you look like a retard who doesn't know what he's talking about. Get mad, faggot
>>74783437
Most people would identify Ron Paul with the libertarian movement, and they wouldn't be wrong in doing so. He's closer to a libertarian than he is a paleocon. However I will admit he isn't entirely one or the other. Once again, fuck off with your semantic bullshit you insufferable faggot.
This is not a conservative board, this is a republican board.
/pol/ is friendly to nationalists, populists, conservatives, reactionaries,white nationalists, national-socialists and traditionalists.
Every other political affiliation or school of thought is frowned upon or only tolerated like the lolbertarians.
>>74784313
>Most people would identify Ron Paul with the libertarian movement
Source? Oh that's right your bringing up anecdotal bullshit.
>they wouldn't be wrong in doing so.
I beg to differ.
>fuck off with your semantic bullshit you insufferable faggot.
No thanks. I like annoying you :^)
>>74784796
Around 500,000 people must have thought he was a libertarian when they voted for him as the libertarian candidate in the '88 general election. Are 500,000 libertarians voting for the libertarian nominee not libertarian enough for you?
>>74786550
He wasn't the nominee first off. Second I said its a common mistake people make in labeling someone libertarian or palecon because they share some ideas. Still my gripe with you was calling Paul a libertarian which even you yourself have gone back on now because it was a stupid fucking thing to say in the first place. Doesn't change the fact he supported Buchanan (the palecon poster boy) and supported the Constitution Party candidate for president even when the libertarian party had more voters/members.
>>74787634
>First off he wasn't the nominee
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_1988
>Paul defeated Native American activist Russell Means at the Libertarian Party's National Convention in Seattle to win the party's presidential nomination.
I admit he is not a true libertarian nor is he a true paleocon. All I'm saying is that a lot of his policies favor libertarianism over paleoconservatism.
>>74788326
>All I'm saying is that a lot of his policies favor libertarianism over paleoconservatism.
I'd say it's the opposite desu
>>74777840
It's a board that frequently discusses politics and current events while being politically incorrect
>>74777840
Neither.
