Commies for Clinton
 

Hillary receives an endorsement from Communist Party USA.

http://peoplesworld.org/landslide-in-november/

I'm sure she's proud of this.

I see nothing in this article you linked to that indicates that the Communist Party has endorsed Clinton.

If you can provide me with documentation that they have I will certainly reconsider, and possibly withdraw my opposition to her.

This great news for Hillary and it will mean that finally all of Bernie's supporters will go both feet in for Hillary, start singing praises of Hillary, dancing in the streets and all that good stuff. Now I am beginning to feel sorry for poor Donald, the GOP is crying in their soup.

I still don't see the "endorsement":confused:

But whatever. I'm a So************************t, not a communist.

There you go, spreading lies again. There is no endorsement in that article beyond a mention of Bernie's.

The word Communist doesn't even appear in the article, and the only mention of endorsement is Bernie endorsing Hillary. Is your post intended to deflect from the fact that the KKK, the American Nazi Party and David Duke have endorsed Trump?

Peoples World is an "organ" of the Communist party USA but, otherwise, it's just whell up to his old tricks.

You guys seem a bit slow today. Let me help you out.

http://peoplesworld.org/about-us

People's World and Mundo Popular are known for partisan coverage. We take sides. Yours. The editorial mission is partisan to the working class, people of color, women, young people, seniors, LGBT community, to international solidarity; to popularize the ideas of Marxism and Bill of Rights so************************m. The websites enjoy a special relationship with the Communist Party USA, founded in 1919, and publish its news and views.

So, the Communist Party view on Clinton's candidacy, from the article, is this:

The union movement, communities of color, students, women, progressives and the newborn "political revolution" can help generate voter enthusiasm by talking and tweeting about Clinton and the issues. Challenging sexism is a must as well as racism, which has been a coded (and overt) staple of presidential elections for decades.

They want folks out there - boots on the ground - advocating for Hillary.

However, there are many weeks until Election Day. "Clinton could easily lose to Trump, and she could also easily end up winning in a landslide," Silver writes.

"Winning in a landslide" is needed now more than ever, and that landslide for Clinton could swing control of the Senate to Democrats, and other potential positive effects could be felt on the "down ballot" congressional and state races.

They want Hillary to win "in a landslide". If that's not an endorsement, I don't know what is.

Purposefully obtuse again? Bravo.

The article is clearly an endorsement of Hillary by People's World.

If you were to have said that the CPUSA "supports" Clinton, I'd have agreed but, as usual, you've played fast and loose with the facts. I get that "(t)he union movement, communities of color, students, women, progressives and the newborn 'political revolution'" are constituencies that you care FA about, but most of us do and it should be obvious even to you that Trump would be a disaster when it comes to social justice.

whell, if I am an odds maker, which is the better news, Commies for Hillary or Nazi's for Trump? Since your only intent is flame throwing, this line of attack is idiotic. :rolleyes:

Right John. :rolleyes:

So, just curious, when THE publication of the Communist Party USA tells folks to get out and talk up a candidate, and then go out and vote for her in landslide proportions, what do you call it? Are you sticking with "support"?

If calling for a landslide victory by Clinton is only "support", what would an "endorsement" look like? A coronation?

An endorsement by the Communist Party would most likely contain some form of the word "endorse" in it. I would also expect the word "Communist" to be in there somewhere too. :rolleyes:

I would also expect it to be coming from some person or persons that were authorized to speak for the Communist Party in an official capacity. I know. It's a lot to ask isn't it?

If you can point me to evidence that the American Nazi Party has endorsed Trump and why, then you'd have a point. All I've seen so far are some quotes that WaPo dug up from a radio show that no one listens to.

You're no angel, so its rather unsightly to see you dancing on the head of a pin like this.

Who cares what the CPUSA wants? BFD, Whell. :rolleyes:

You're right whell. The American Nazi Party didn't actually endorse Trump. They just said that he presented a "real opportunity" for white nationalists to expand and advance their cause.

So, if you think the CPUSA "endorsed" Clinton, how is it you can't see that the American Nazi Party endorsed Trump?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...R2o#.kwDBaKNvR

Introspection might be required first on your part. Apparently you can't tell the difference between a news article in Buzzfeed (a "news source, but the way, that Pew Research Center found less reliable as an info source than the Glen Beck show :rolleyes:) and the quasi - official mouthpiece for the CPUSA.

Two pages and 17 posts later, I guess some folks do.... :rolleyes:

Contained within the Buzz Feed article is a statement from the leader of the American Nazi Party which expresses the same level of support for Trump as the editorial board of the unofficial organ of the CPUSA expressed for Clinton. Arguing that these are not equivalent is casuistry (which, considering the source, shouldn't surprise anyone).

No, what we care about is profound dishonesty of your "oeuvre" here on PC.

John, I understand that you really, really want to change the subject, but citing Buzzfeed is kind of a new low for you. However, if you insist, here's a quote from the article you posted:

Suhayda wrote in past American Nazi Party reports he’d avoid giving statements on Trump, saying it would hurt Trump to be associated with him.

That doesn't even sound like support, much less an endorsement.

Now, go reread your article and see if you can find ANYTHING in there close to calling for people to go out and advocate or campaign, or calling for voter activism to achieve a LANDSLIDE victory. Hell, your article doesn't even contain the word "vote". :rolleyes:

Try again, genius.

Didn't KKK endorse Trump also or am imagining. If true, that gives Trump an insurmountable advantage to Trump. 🙄

Along with David Duke, a perfect trifecta of hate.

Sorry guys, but the KKK "is with her".

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...-for-president

So she's got the commies and the haters on her side. Sounds about right to me.

Are you saying that Buzz Feed made the quote up? They have fucking audio. Did you listen to it? Typical whell shit (of which there is nothing lower). When you can't argue on substance, impugn the source.

Obvious attempted rat fuck.

Sorry Whell. Wet behind the ears, are we? http://www.snopes.com/kkk-endorses-hillary-clinton/

Did I say that? No. Simply said that they have about the same reliability as the Glenn Beck show.

Do you usually build your own straw men and that beat them to death?

What about the audio? Did you listen to it? Did they fake that?

Snopes says its "highly improbable", huh? :rolleyes: Well, they can discuss it with the folks at USA Today. If Snopes can get USA Today to retract their story - I suspect that's highly improbable - then I'll have another look at the Snopes piece.

Can you point me to any post were I said that anything in that article was "faked"?

Go ahead. I'll wait.

One can not deny the fact Putin endorsed Trump. That would be the commie endorsement to be worried about!

If any others existed....


Barney

Putin made some observations Trump, but it fell short of an endorsement.

"He is a very flamboyant man, very talented, no doubt about that," Putin said. "He is an absolute leader of the presidential race, as we see it today. He says that he wants to move to another level of relations, to a deeper level of relations with Russia. How can we not welcome that? Of course we welcome it."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...e-donald-trump

And of course, by John's standards, this is nowhere near an endorsement. :rolleyes:

It was clearly implicit in your posts @19 and @ 23 or are we playing the "plausible deniability" game?

http://politicalchat.org/showpost.ph...1&postcount=19

http://politicalchat.org/showpost.ph...9&postcount=23

But, there certainly is an abundance of endorsement for Trump from the White Supremacist community. Why we even have a prominent member running for public office....as a Republican. Not that that means anything...........Noooooo....:rolleyes:

The values expressed in that article are ones that I can warmly embrace. I have no problem with someone with those values speaking highly of Hillary. On the other hand, when I see people expressing hope that a Trump presidency would advance the cause of white supremacy, I have to look at the values Trump is espousing. That is not my my picture of a great America.

There's a HUGE chasm between "unreliable" as quoted by a third party polling / research service, and your assertion that I claimed a video/audio recording was faked. As the saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

The views expressed in the article are a fraction of what the Communist party stands for. History shows us the rest. Do you warmly espouse the destruction, death and loss of human rights and freedoms that occur under communist regimes?

In the meantime, here's another angry hater for Hillary, the guy who got his son all cooked up on gay hate:

http://www.wptv.com/news/state/orlan...y-in-kissimmee