all 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 8 points 6 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    That's really odd then, for Platner to repeatedly call it his 'Totenkopf' over many years. Seems like important context to leave out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    Wtf? All I said was the Platner had repeatedly referred to his tattoo as his Totenkopf years before publicly acknowledging the nazi tattoo. Why would that be removed, do we hate journalism? https://edition.cnn.com/2025/10/24/politics/graham-platner-nazi-tattoo-evidence-kfile-invs

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    Nowhere in that article, or the associated links, does Platner call it “his Totenkopf.”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Reading is hard sometimes, I'm sorry you struggled with it:

    Jewish Insider first reported about the former acquaintance, who recalled Platner referring to the image as “my Totenkopf” in a joking way more than a decade ago. CNN spoke with that same acquaintance, who reiterated the recollection. Genevieve McDonald, Platner’s former political director, told the Bangor Daily News that she had been aware of the tattoo since at least August and that Platner himself acknowledged it “could be problematic.”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

    My mistake. Not sure why the word search didn’t find it before. I’ll restore the original comment. I’ll forgive the self-righteous indignation because I can understand why having your memory questioned is frustrating.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    You didn't question my memory, you questioned my honesty, and I took that personally. I appreciate the apology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Good thing I’m not campaigning for office, or that mistake would disqualify me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I question whether you are qualified to be a moderator, seeing how you called me a liar, called me indignant for correcting you, and failed to restore my comment after promising to do so 3 hours ago, probably because restoring it would make you look silly for removing it in the first place.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    eyyyy, hit em with that spreading misinfo and being a psyop BAN. Dude was earlier talking about how people with trauma/PTSD are less capable, unstable and can't be trusted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • To clarify, the unstable personality could be entirely separate from the ptsd. Ptsd manifests in a variety of ways, but in none of my comments did I say ptsd is the reason why he is unstable. He has gone through massive personality and belief changes, that's a fact. He has been diagnosed with ptsd, that is also a fact. Both of those should be considered when putting someone in a position of power for 6 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago*

    Platner calls for a rebuilding of the American military and running it more efficiently. The opposite of not doing endless wars.

  • source
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    "Opponents", also known as "people who have thought about his past for more than 5 seconds and realized he could've truly had a dramatic personality change within the last year, but even if that is the case, pretty much anybody else is better qualified, and his reaction to people having concerns about his nazi past with nazi tattoos and nazi friends doing some nazi-esque shit in the name of the US military does not inspire confidence in his ability to recognize and respect humanity in all its forms."

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (7 children)

    hurray, 6 more years of Collins. That's what you want, right? Because that's the reality you're promoting.

    I don't know what fairyland unicorn candidate you've got hidden somewhere, but we have to live in this reality. And in this reality, the choice was between Schumers handpicked corpo geriatric AIPAC Janet Mills, the GOP lapdog Susan Collins, and Platner. Make your pick lefty. Or run yourself. If no one is good enough for you, then go on, go set the example.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • Millions of people live in Maine, progressives like you pushed this asshole cuz he said 'Schumer bad' and yall refused to see any red flags. Now the most predictable scandal ever derailed his campaign, and Dems are forced to choose a candidate without a proper primary, again. And you'll probably still blame Dems somehow, refuse to learn anything, and fall for the next tshirt/hoodie wearing 'blue-collar' idiot that runs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    You can't escape the fact that Platner is either:

    A. A liar, a mercenary, and a nazi

    or

    B. A ptsd suffering veteran with an incredibly unstable personality which currently aligns with our political views

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I can escape your false dichotomy, and do. I reject your premise on the grounds that not everyone sees things in extremes. You should try it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    It's not an extreme, the second scenario appears to be the mainstream view among democrats, although with less focus on the potential for an unstable individual to do unexpected things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    the second scenario appears to be the mainstream view among democrats

    Why the fuck would "the mainstream view among democrats" be even the slightest bit persuasive? Cite proof or GTFO.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    dude... you're really doubling down on this. So, trauma shaming is fine. You're saying "hey people with PTSD, you're unstable and shouldn't be trusted. Your traumas make you a worse person". That's what you're putting out. You good? Are you good with that message?

    What's a parallel here? You about to tell rape victims that their traumas makes them unreliable judges of character? Does that sound alright to you? Same thought process. Is that the kind of person you are? Someone who shames people for having trauma in their past?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -5 points 6 months ago

    No I reject that completely, leaders need to be held to a higher standard. There are so many ways for him to invest in and volunteer his time to help his community that don't involve giving him power over others. Mental health issues and/or an unstable personality should absolutely be taken into account for senate candidates, lest we get another Fetterman. Additionally, just framing it him having PTSD is rather disingenuous. Platner was not the victim of a war, he was the openly admitted participant in a black ops wet-work team. He has, under his own volition, admitted to torturing people. If he feels traumatized by that, well, i have a hard time being very sympathetic. Comparing that to a victim of rape is probably not your best work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -21 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    So how long until they do a piece called yes they are an out and about nazi running as a dem, but here's why you need to vote for them to stop trump.

    Closer to elections or during the 2028 presidential primaries?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 14 points 6 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Huh? What's with Warren catching strays? She's been out doing events supporting Platner.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    My only real criticism of Warren is that she only seems to pop up as some kind of "activist" during election season. After that, she fucks off and basically toes the partyline. It comes off as very "performative", very "controlled".

    And she never has a real chance at the presidency, so the most she can do is basically "shame" other candidates. That shit she pulled with Bernie in 2018, trying to shade him as a chauvinist, lying that he said "a woman can't be the president", unbelievable.

    But perhaps the worst thing she does is create division AFTER primaries. Before primaries, it's a freeforall, and you absolutely SHOULD be critical of all opponents, party or otherwise. Do your best to cut out the corpos, the fakers, the shitheads... but after the candidate is picked, and the only opponent is the fascist in the GOP, then the time for discussion is over. You need to stfu, unite and face the real enemy. But Warren couldn't do that..... and she continued to sow division and doubt all the way to the general election, playing a crucial part in democrats not turning out to vote and letting Trump win.

    Okay, so I have a lot of criticism of Warren. On paper, her polices are very sound and very progressive. But as a person, as a party member, she's a liability. And so many "Warren voters" followed her with their "protest votes" during the election (not counting the ones who just didn't bother showing up). And she never apologized for that.

    So, I mean... cool, good for her that she's endorsing Platner now. Her policies are progressive, but she and her supporters are kinda shitheads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    Just because you don't follow her doesn't mean she's not pushing progressive things in off years. She was the first Senator to call Gaza a genocide, voted in the progressive block on all the votes I can remember where there was a progressive vs. moderate split, and is constantly advocating for more progressive positions on things. Which is all any of the progressives do because their actual power as legislators is basically nil and all they have is their voice.

    This just seems to be a kind of nonsensical made up version of her. You're both criticizing her for (supposedly) toeing the party line while also complaining that she sowed division against Harris through the general election (something that's just entirely made up) and led Warren voters to stay home (which is just wildly out of step with their whole vibe). Is your imaginary version supposed to be a "controlled" party loyalist or a rabble-rouser sabotaging the party nominee?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    totally slipped that 2018 Bernie comment there, didn't ya? Don't wanna talk about that one, eh? I get it.

    You can defend her, and look, I get it, publicly she has good policy. I'm not even anti-Warren, just anti-some-of-the-shit-she's-pulled. I'd still prefer Warren over Biden, or Hillary, or Kamala. I'd vote for her next election if she had a serious chance of winning and defeating the GOP. But she doesn't. And when she doesn't have a chance to win she needs to support, not tear down. She needs to pick and choose her battles, time and place, and prioritize what's important. And from my perspective, you're welcome to disagree, she doesn't do that. She throws dirt on allies and highroads in a way that only shames them instead of building up a unified coalition. She did it to Bernie, she did it to Kamala. When she's running, she's primarily concerned with herself. Impending cataclysmic fascist opposition be damned.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    I don't think they were complaining about Warren, so much as they know enough history of gopherking to know that he was pushing Warren over Harris in the last GE.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Is that because you remember gopherking was doing that or because sailor's response implied it? Because I've never even heard of anyone calling for Warren to have been the last nominee. That'd be pretty divorced from reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    25 comments in c/usa@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 21 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    The framing of facts as "smears" is ridiculous, it's literally his self admitted past. He is a war criminal who worked as a Blackwater mercenary that was responsible for Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse. He had probably the 2nd most recognizable nazi symbol behind the swastika, a totenkopf, tattooed on his body.

    The reason why these "smears" didn't work is most Maine voters are functionally imperialist and nazi aligned whether they would admit it or not.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] [S] -11 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    That's pretty bleak, and luckily, totally wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Which part is wrong? Seems to all hold up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] [S] -9 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Really, majority are "Nazi-aligned"? What planet are you living on?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    In that most Maine voters don't seek to overthrow the US Empire and merely reform it from within, they are siding with a genocidal settler-colonial empire. I would have worded it differently, but you said teagrll's comment was "totally wrong," implying the totality of the comment is wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Do a lemmy search for him on either hexbear or lemmygrad, if you want to see his history, and current stances. He's a proud war criminal.

    He went to war against the people of Afghanistan and Iraq multiple times, and iirc served proudly at one of the US torture camps in Iraq.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago*

    Nazi aligned also meaning that he went to a different country and literally tortured, murdered people different from him, with a giant Nazi tattoo on him that anyone past 2001 would recognize as Nazi insignia. You can’t lie to me about this guy. Military ppl are the fucking worst they all think they’re so cool. Fucking gross murderers. They’ll Burn in the hell they claim to believe in

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 13 points 6 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago* (7 children)

    And they still won't get it, which they should realise after decades of dangling it in front of them, but alas. Also i wouldn't call dems "left".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago*

    I genuinely believe it's a card the bourgeoisie is reserving to preserve imperialism by uniting the populace in support of the regime. The DNC can pivot to a social imperialist stance and retain imperialism for a bit longer that way, US wars are all unpopular now and cracks are showing. A social fascist pivot by the DNC could buy some time and make US imperialism more popular.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago

    Limited but consistent messaging..

    Actually believes what they say..

    Narrow and focused critique of Democrats and Democratic power.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

    usians apparently don't care about nazis in power as seen by the many they don't mind having.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    So how long until they do a piece called yes they are an out and about nazi running as a dem, but here's why you need to vote for them to stop trump.

    Closer to elections or during the 2028 presidential primaries?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    unfortunately, they seem to focusing on desensitizing usians to the horrors of genocide and ethnic cleansing so that americans won't give a fuck about it as much as the isrealis do so that usians will readily ignore it come the next election.

  • source
  • parent
  • 17 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 19 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    "Electability" is a cancer on the Democrat Party

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    Establishment politicians and mainstream media finally learning there are consequences to nobody trusting you?

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    All you need to know about the DNC and the "vote blue no matter who" is that after the DNC pick lost (horribly) to Platner, their pick did not bow out gracefully and endorse him. They did not try to tie their campaign to his, to unite and try to defeat the GOP incumbent . The DNC "choice" didn't give a fuck about supporting the people's choice.

    That's the DNC, that's the kind of people they lift up. And it's about fucking time they lost to a progressive instead of continually losing to the GOP every goddamn time.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    It's worth noting that "blue no matter who" is just a bandaid, just a drive to get fascists out of power long enough to enact voting reform. The two party system is an organic result of First Past The Post voting; we have to move to some form of Rank Choice if we're ever to see any progress. Thankfully voting regulations are on the local level, where change is still possible. This is one of the many reasons Trump is trying to federalize elections.

    Until we get voting reform, there will only be Two Parties, and they will always drift to the right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    I just wish the math was done about 75-80 years earlier than it was. If someone had shown the founders the mathematical proof that FPTP would lead to a two party system, Washington would have railed against it. He hated political parties in general, and would have absolutely hated the idea of a two party system.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yep, it was never about just accepting what Democrats tepidly offered. Primary them every election, drive out the establishment. But keep the open fascists in the Republican party out of power at the same time. Democrats aren't good. Republicans are far worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago*

    Democrats aren’t good. Republicans are far worse.

    100% this, absolutely.

    I, by no means, love the DNC. Fuck most of them. But the number of tankies and leftys that have lost the plot screaming "harm reduction doesn't work!!!" makes my fucking blood boil. If your decision in the face of fascism is to help bring it about by virtue signalling instead of accomplishing anything, you've sided with the fascist, full stop. No amount of self delusion will change the actual factual outcome. Your Kantian self-righteousness isn't going to provide any comfort to the family that's being thrown in cages.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

    that after the DNC pick lost (horribly) to Platner,

    What?

    Who was "the DNC pick"?

    And why did the DNC chair of all people work against "the dnc pick"?

    The DNC chair explicitly saying people who wanted Plattner for the general to vote for him in the primary. And that past mistakes are something someone can overcome...

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5562531-platner-resurfaced-comments-dnc-chair/

    Like, what logical steps are you skipping here?

    You're saying the literal opposite of reality right now, that's the most the DNC has (and likely will) say about a primary challenger.

    Martin would have broken the biasy regulations he implemented if he endorsed him any harder...

    Did you even know those were implemented?

    Like, everything you're complaining about was fixed over a year ago, but you use "dnc" like trump uses "antifa"...

    You clearly don't know what the organization is or how its structured, you just know billionaire owned media agrees with you...

    Don't listen to billionaires, none of them are on our side and all do them are pissed they don't control both parties anymore.

    Why the fuck do you think they're focusing on DNC instead of the literal fascist government?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I'm using the fact that the figureheads of the democrat party, the Senate Minority Leader Schumer actively supported Mills over Platner. Because they still haven't learned their lesson. That they even tried to raise up a different candidate shows the problem with the DNC. That other party leaders just let that happen, or didn't shut Schumer down is the problem. One the most powerful members of the DNC handpicked a corpo candidate and then actively campaigned for their pick and AGAINST the pick of the people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    the figureheads of the democrat party, the Senate Minority Leader Schumer

    Oh ok.

    See, the problem was if Dem politicians didn't vote for neoliberals for leadership, the neoliberal DNC would cutoff funding to the whole state, handing a bunch of seats to Republicans.

    They were fine with this, because their goal was to never have enough power to actually do what Dem voters want.

    Congress votes for their leaders in the end of January.

    DNC voting members vote for chair (when a Dem wins they appoint one) in the beginning of February.

    So when Schumer and Jeffries had their elections for leadership, they had the full weight of an entirely biased DNC chair who was appointed by Biden, the threats were real.

    Then a few days later, the DNC voting members pivoted from neoliberals, and started dumping all that hoarded VF money on the state parties.

    Schumer and Jeffries have been lame ducks this entire congress, and they will continue to do so.

    They will also intentionally act like jackasses and that they are the party, because they want to depress turnout so they can get Newsom or Harris in, and they can appoint a neoliberal chair again.

    Like...

    Does any of that make sense?

    "The DNC" is the chair. When Schumer acts like he's "The DNC" it's so people like you will do what you're doing and depress dem primary turnout....

    Surely, you have to realize billionaires are willing to lie and do fucked up shit to hold onto their hoarded wealth, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    I think you're giving wayyyy to much credit to your neuroticism that you can't possibly expect out of the average person and voter. That's neverminding that it looks like it was written by a blue Alex Jones. If your point is so convoluted that it's hard to explain, then perhaps you don't understand it well enough to explain.

    More importantly, it doesn't matter if your minutia of info is correct on technicality, because that's not how people perceive the DNC and the relationships between the party heads.... so yea. Ending your rant with "its all billionaires!!!!!" may be right... but it has the same energy as "chemtrails!!!". You might be right, but also, you look crazy, and that's the only thing most people are going to take away listening to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    , it doesn’t matter if your minutia of info is correct on technicality, because that’s not how people perceive the DNC and the relationships between the party heads…

    Hold up...

    Did you really just say I'm acting like Alex Jones...

    And then in the very next sentence say "facts don't matter cuz feelings?"

    but also, you look crazy, and that’s the only thing most people are going to take away listening to you.

    I give zero fucks how people perceive me, you wouldn't believe me if I told you why.

    But...

    The important thing here is you stopped arguing that Schumer is the DNC.

    If you're on board with that, and that the sole person who is in charge of the DNC was out there defending Plattner 7 months ago, like that link way back when...

    Then we're good here right?

    You can think I look crazy, but if it worked it worked

    And you can start explaining this to others, maybe in a less crazy way. But hey man, whatever works. The only thing that matters is people vote in the Dem primaries, pull em as far left as you can. Even if you do it to spite Schumer, that's 100% cool with me, fuck that guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    I'm always on board with saying Fuck Schumer. Just lead with that. And Fuck Pelosi and Jeffries. But you still rant like a crazy person. Keep up the good fight, but like... don't expect to get a lot of converts with your approach.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    Who was "the DNC pick"?

    Janet Mills obviously. The one the minority leader, and the main PAC publicly endorsed and funded.

    And why did the DNC chair of all people work against "the dnc pick"?

    The DNC chair is not the DNC itself. Schumer has been a leader in the DNC for 45 years..... The chair has been around for two years and has never been in power while holding the majority.

    You're saying the literal opposite of reality right now, that's the most the DNC has (and likely will) say about a primary challenger.

    And which candidate did the PAC money go too?

    You clearly don't know what the organization is or how its structured, you just know billionaire owned media agrees with you...

    And you clearly think the Chair person hold any meaningful sway over the most powerful elected officials in the party....

    Why the fuck do you think they're focusing on DNC instead of the literal fascist government?

    Have you watched the news lately? Trump's stupid face is plastered over every network 24 hours a day. The major networks are not hyper fixating on the internal politics of the DNC.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Good to see the people are finally catching up with the new DNC...

    Martin said Sunday that he believes “in second chances” and that “a lot of people say things at their most vulnerable times.”

    "The question for me is whether or not they actually learn from them, whether or not they actually reflect on those, that they’re sincere in their apology and more importantly that they have changed their behavior,” the first-year DNC chair added.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5562531-platner-resurfaced-comments-dnc-chair/

    Only seven months behind.

    But again, he's not gonna endorse anyone in a primary, because the dnc should never pick favorites in any primary:

    Martin, though, said the DNC will not “put the thumb on the scale for anyone,” despite the public’s concerns over candidates’ ages.

    "It’s up to the primary voters in all these states to decide who they think will be the best candidate to represent us as we take on Republicans in each of those states,” Martin added. “My job as a DNC chair is to build the infrastructure we need to win.”

    Like, his defense of Plattner 7 months ago was the most we'll see the DNC get involved in a primary, and even that was "if voters want him, voters want him".

    It's like people don't realize it took 30 years to get here...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 12 comments in c/fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 9 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I looked up what his tattoo looked like. I had never seen that design before. I would have just assumed its a stylized jolly roger. If I were into tattoos, I could see my dumb ass 19yr old self getting that tattoo. I was really into pirates back then.

    I don't get why anybody thinks its farfetched that a 19yr old marine thought a skull and crossbones design out of a catalog at a tattoo parlor looked cool, and got it while out with his buddies. Then years later someone finally points out that its a Nazi tattoo, he gets it covered up when he is able to.

    I've seen documentaries about reformed neo nazis covering up their nazi tattoos, and working to de-program, and get other neo nazis out of the lifestyle. People can change for the better, and people can simply be ignorant of the myriad of nazi symbology and get a dumb tattoo.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 5 points 6 months ago*

    He was a machine gun section leader and then he worked as a private military guard/grunt, which everyone acts like is this shocking betrayal not understanding that for the individual soldiers actually doing soldier stuff that isn't an unusual career path and it simply isn't the same as being a CEO of a company like that... and while you can criticize it you can also make the argument it might be good to have someone in the Senate who has actually experienced what it is like to be a grunt in the US military, not everybody needs to have that experience, diversity is good but a couple more of those and a couple less lawyers would do us a whole lot of good I think.

    I am not saying the guy is perfect either, it is just that the accusations are so lazy and I think voters see that in Maine clearly.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Have you seen Hegseth's tattoo? Why aren't we complaining about actual nazis, with actual power, instead of this guy who isnt even elected yet, and has said he was wrong?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

    Smear campaign? What part of him having a nazi tattoo and explicitly acknowledging what it was many years before getting into politics and then lying about it is a smear? All of this has been objectively verified, there's no debate here.

    Did he run on a left-leaning campaign? Absolutely. Should you trust nazis that sound nice? This might surprise you, but they often lie to gain power.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Please stop spreading misinformation, Platner is not a Nazi. If you are going to make that claim you need proof and you need to source it from someone who is credible, not a rightwing hack or clueless news outlet repeating whatever line they are fed about Platner.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    yeah, this is insane. platner has potential. his deep historical trove of unvarnished fascist bashing appears legit and his current policy proposals are miles better than 99% of what is out there. don't like him? leave your goddamn basement and run for something. I currently dont see the lie on platner's face or in his words.

    the wife and I just wrote up our monthly pittance contribution list and he's on it because "fuck collins".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    What part of my comment is misinformation?

    • Did he not have a nazi tattoo?
    • Did he not explicitly acknowledge that it was a Totenkopf years before running for public office?
    • Did he not lie about knowing what it was after the fact, during his campaign?
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

    It's not really a "smear" when dude is a former state thug with a nazi tattoo, but I guess he removed/covered it up? Ok, but can't blame people for being upset.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago*

    Reposting my exact comment from a few days ago:

    Smear campaign? I read his public reddit posts bragging about murder, looked at his lifelong Nazi tattoo (before he covered it up for office), and formed the only possible conclusion an honest person could..

  • source