No. When crazy right wing blogs write stuff like this it’s not considered hyperbole. It shouldn’t be written off either. It’s uncivil, dangerous rhetoric.

It’s not about his politics. I don’t care that they criticize his policies or his methods. What is terrible is calling for a politician to die because you disagree with him. You can criticize policies without calling for the politician’s death and talk about his or her looks.

So a carbon copy of Deadspin?

Please send us a viable democratic candidate.

Deadspin showing its class by calling for someone to kill themselves in the headline of an article where they proceed to say he should be killed by a train and attack his looks.

You want Scott Walker to die? On what planet is that okay for you to write? You are a complete asshole and deadspin should issue an apology to Scott walker on your behalf.

This should be the inaugural post of the new Gawker sub-blog, Inadequate Man.

Jesus Christ, deadspin fucking SUCKS. So sick of this liberal bullshit. Never coming back. Suck my dick.

Its just really disheartening to hear a person being ill-informed and close-minded yell at other people for being ill-informed and close-minded. Might as well have just just “Go Blue Team Go! Everyone on the Red Team is a bigot who makes generalizations about other people!” The hypocrisy kills me.

Let’s be real. If a white athlete had said what Richard Sherman had said, Deadspin would be making any ad hominem attack they can muster. They excuse differing opinions from their own ONLY if it makes them sound racially tolerant.

But can black lives melt steel beams?

It’s almost as if people can have differing opinions on polarizing subjects... And get this... Neither one of them has to be wrong or right! You're really growing up, gawker.

So you knock Rand Paul for being a Libertarian nerd (half true - he is openly not a libertarian, and he absolutely knows what one looks like having grown up with one of the most vocal and famous ones in his own house), then go on to say the federal government can’t possibly competently rule such a massive country with…

Well, relative to other countries world-wide, we’re pretty sane. The craziest candidate by far, the one everyone is talking about, is an insanely rich businessman who sometimes says inflammatory and arrogant things. I mean, hell, watch Last Week Tonight (which I know you guys do), and it seems every week they do a bit…

Honestly this is the most sane bunch of Republicans I’ve seen in a long time. I’m registered as an Unaffiliated voter, but I’ve always been more old-school politics like what the Republicans showed last night - Defending our country, wanting to change old bullshit Amendments that essentially are giving way too many…

Every four years we deal not only with the exaggerated rhetoric of those vying for their nomination, but the exaggerated rhetoric of those viewing and critiquing the race. Is today’s Republican party a bit more “unreasonable” than they have been historically? Perhaps. Are there still intelligent, competent people in…

Okay, you know what, it pisses me off that I have to come to George’s defense here. The attack on 9/11 has not one damn thing to do with this yahoo. Blaming him for that because it happened “on his watch” is just as fucking imbecilic as blaming Roosevelt for the attack on Pearl Harbor or Lincoln for the attack on Fort…

Haha, “100% correct.” It's easy to feel comfortable in your opinions and beliefs when everyone else is whiny, wrong, stupid, etc. it's possible for reasonable people to disagree, drastically at that.

Dissolve the United States, replacing it with a set of city-states, villages, and thinly-peopled hinterlands; let every public that wants one have their own Carly Fiorina or Bobby Jindal, and let everyone else go about their business. The candidate who proposes that will be the one to get behind.

You really thought “Dissolve the United States” was the best title here? Really? Get the fuck out