Antifa Explained: Very Informative Primer

[WinterBorn]

Typical white supremacist rant.

I am a lot of things. But I am certainly not a white supremacist. The video echos many of the facts I have seen from other sources.

I did not vote for Trump and I am not a supporter. But these ANTIFA freaks are domestic terrorists.

The strange part is that I don't think they rise to that level. They would like to be and may get there yet, but I doubt it. These are brain dead children raised by brain dead parents, they can do some damage but sooner or later they will learn reality.

They are led by people who know full well what they are doing. They are well coordinated, despite the appearance of chaos.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trump should pivot on immigration, deport the criminals including Antifa and the students and staff at Berkley and keep the the America Loving, hard working, family oriented Mexicans; we'd be a million times better off

 

[DarkFury]

Must see video for the folks who are just learning about these filthy pieces of garbage.

To be outright honest we need to return to the days when we shot rioters and looters down in the street.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Must see video for the folks who are just learning about these filthy pieces of garbage.

I have Peer Reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

It is a bit disingenuous to think that every person who voted for Clinton was a radical liberal, just as much as it is to presume that everyone who voted for President Trump was a republican. Both of these candidates were exceptionally controversial for various reasons.

Even if I had thought Trump was sexist and racist, I probably /still/ would have voted for him rather than Clinton. - not exactly someone I, as a capitalist, have /anything/ in common with. However, I believe in the choice of the people, not the choice of the party (which is essentially what the DNC does via super pac's.) Bernie should have won that race IMO, even if they believed he wouldn't get as much support lacking the superficial catch phrases like "Glass Ceiling" and "Secretary of State" and "Experience," they should do what their /people/ want.

So you are upset about how the DNC treated Bernie? Read this
Bernie Sanders Fans’ DNC ‘Collusion’ Conspiracy Theory is Embarrassing Garbage

I cannot believe you just wasted my fucking time with that unrelated link...

Allow me to simplify since you've apparently mistaken my posting to be about what amounts to fake news influencing /shit/ - [despite the fact that my post says absolutely nothing about news reports, accusations, or anything even remotely in that vein]:

Essentially, the DNC super pac's decide the candidate, rather than the actual voting members (aka your average joe Democrat persons votes) - I think that is wrong. I believe that the super pac's weight infringes/oppresses the "democratic process" of selecting the D's candidate's.

You must really be confused this morning. The DNC set up a joint superpac with both candidates. Bernie chose not to use any super pacs, so the one set up with Bernie wasn't used. Did you expect Hillary and the DNC to not use their joint legal source of funds just because Bernie didn't want to?

Listen.... You are just a useful idiot that cannot admit he was duped and you support the most corrupt party in American history. Science has proven that you have to shut off part of your brain in order to be politically leftist.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Scientists claim they can change your belief on immigrants and God – with MAGNETS

 

[EverCurious]

Reference: "Hillary Clinton: 2,814 (includes 609 superdelegates)Bernie Sanders: 1,893 (includes 47 superdelegates) Not yet allocated: 58"
- Who's Winning the Presidential Delegate Count?

(For the record I'm not really being specific in thinking superpacs (superdelegtes) are wrong in only the 2016 race, my point was actually broader than /just/ Sanders/Clinton, but I think that particular race was one of the most blatant "abuses.")

"These Democratic Party superdelegates include elected officials and party activists and officials. Democratic superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination. This contrasts with convention "pledged" delegates who are selected based on the party primaries and caucuses in each U.S. state, in which voters choose among candidates for the party's presidential nomination. Moreover, superdelegates are permitted to participate in the primary elections as regular voters."
- Superdelegate - Wikipedia



Now connect the dots between superdelegates and superpacs:

Critics who believe money corrupts the political process say the court rulings and creation of super PACs opened the floodgates to widespread corruption. In 2012, U.S. Sen. John McCain warned: "I guarantee there will be a scandal, there is too much money washing around politics, and it’s making the campaigns irrelevant."

McCain and other critics said the rulings allowed wealthy corporations and union to have an unfair advantage in electing candidates to federal office.

In writing his dissenting opinion for the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens opined of the majority: "At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt."

Another criticism of super PACs arises from the allowance of some nonprofit groups to contribute to them without disclosing where their money came from, a loophole that allows so-called dark money to flow directly into elections." - Super PACs Spent More Than $1 Billion in 2016

And I will note; the critics, McCain, and Justice Stevens were all 100% correct - a large segment of the Democratic party realized that corruption had bore it's fruit in the Clinton/Sanders run. So the DNC hammered out a new compromise on how to handle these [superpac funded] superdelegates:

"On July 23, 2016, ahead of the 2016 Democratic National Convention, the 2016 DNC Rules Committee voted overwhelmingly (158–6) to adopt a superdelegate reform package. The new rules were the result of a compromise between the Clinton and the Sanders campaigns; in the past, Sanders had pressed for the complete elimination of superdelegates. I 100% agree with his original position, but the power buyers wouldn't let that happen

Under the reform package, in future Democratic Conventions, about two-thirds of superdelegates would be bound to the results of state primaries and caucuses. In other words, the actual average Joe democrats votes The remaining one-third – Members of Congress, Governors, and distinguished party leaders – would remain unpledged and free to support the candidate of their choice." In other words, the wealthy corporations and unions
- Superdelegate - Wikipedia

AKA they are now taking into consideration the average Joe Democrats votes more than the corporate and unions votes (the corps and unions have less influence purchasing power now)

And that is why people say that Clinton won because of Superpacs, its not exactly about the "whom" but rather the wholesale sale of votes for the candidates. An example might be (completely fictional example) Let's say that the teachers union has 30 votes and can raise $3 million dollars for campaign contributions. They don't like Sanders "Free College" idea because they think it'll make them less money, or give them less power, so they say we'll back [you] Clinton if [you] do X policy (or in this example "don't do that" might be more appropriate) She agrees to that and they funnel all of their cash and votes to Clinton. Basically what you end up with is not necessarily average joe democrat's "preference" and "chosen candidate" but rather the foxes running the hen house. With corporations they might whore their votes out for a policy or regulation to damage their competition. It's just asking for corruption, and they got it. Pay to play by huge numbers of corporations and unions for Clinton. At the same time, you have the "elite" leaders who generally all get together and agree on who they are backing as a "group." Again Foxes running the hen house. All that back-rubbing and handshaking of the political elite. And average Joe Democrat isn't necessarily on the same page as the superdelegates, but their votes are lessened or diluted or even influenced via ad time money by the inclusion of these 714 foxes (union, corporation, and elite leaders)


I mean if you're cool with that kind of a set up, you trust the politician to be true to their own opinions and not take money for rules/laws/regulations/etc, then that's your choice. I just personally think it is not properly reflecting the votes of the actual average Joe democrats (the new revision is better, but as I noted, I don't think they should exist.)

 

[JimBowie1958]

~hisses and crosses her fingers~

Lol, the Nordic Socialist economy is inevitable.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Scientists claim they can change your belief on immigrants and God – with MAGNETS

As I said, the academics and liberals are the idiots of our society.

That study is so flawed it really shouldnt be called science.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

~hisses and crosses her fingers~

Lol, the Nordic Socialist economy is inevitable.

Fuck that shit.