This post and OP are a perfect example of what is wrong with /r/politics right now [ad hominem and false claim]. No reasoned thought [false claim and straw person]. No civil discussion [false claim and straw person]. No critical thinking [false claim and straw person]. Sketchy sources to say the least [false claim and a self-contradiction]. Where has the intellectual debate gone [false claim]?The post was also gifted Reddit gold.
For example, this post. Fun fact, the New York Times Editorial Board endorsed Hillary Clinton today, not the New York Times [false dichotomy]. EVERY NEWSPAPERS' EDITORIAL BOARDS ENDORSE CANDIDATES [ad populum]. They have been doing it forever [appeal to tradition]. Hillary Clinton is the leading candidate for the Democratic Nomination right now [ad populum] and if you actually read the column, you would understand that they made a choice based on pragmatism [false claim], which is OK [false claim]! There are multiple points of view on every subject [irrelevant], unless you come to /r/politics [false claim]. As a long time political observer [faulty expertise], I was shocked to see in the sub outrageous statements made about the NYTs today [irrelevant]. For well over a hundred years, it has been the gold standard (along with the WSJ and others) for quality news and reporting [false claim and faulty expertise]. It is sad to see how some react to the paper as a whole when the Editorial Board endorses someone not named Bernie Sanders [straw person]. In addition, the article in question was a news piece, not an Editorial piece [false dichotomy].
Also, OPs like this are literally SPAMMING this sub [ad hominem]. Check it out, an account for like 8 hours that literally only posts pro-Bernie, anti-Hillary [ad hominem]. This isn't an isolated case. Look through these forums. They are everywhere [false claim]. Don't get me wrong, new voices and opinions are always welcome in the community [false claim], but when they are created solely for the purpose of pushing an agenda, while not breaking any rules, is still rather slimy [ad hominem].
Most arguments in this genre end up supporting establishment totalitarianisms for some strange reason. Hint for would be social scientists: Do some research on this genre. But that runs into the problem of social scientists not being good at reasoning either.