“While Susan Collins’ campaign is backed by billionaire donors, our campaign is built on a movement funded by the people, with an average donation of $26,” said Graham Platner’s campaign manager.

A new analysis of campaign finance data shows that nearly 100 billionaires and their spouses have contributed to Republican Sen. Susan Collins’ reelection bid so far, funneling nearly $10 million to the incumbent’s campaign committee and PACs supporting her effort to fend off progressive challenger Graham Platner.

The Maine Monitor on Thursday published a list of billionaires who have donated to Collins and Platner, who has called his Republican opponent a “corrupt” protector and beneficiary of an oligarchic political system.

The outlet noted that Collins’ billionaire donation total “stands in stark contrast with the fundraising of her opponent... whose campaign has mostly attracted smaller amounts of funds but from many more people.”

top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 117 points 5 months ago (10 children)

To them, losing the "progressives can't win purple states" narrative would be a catastrophe.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 79 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    Not only can progressives win in purple states, I bet they can win in these supposedly "red" states that have been abandoned by the Dems in recent years. Progressive takeover of the Democratic Party needs to happen ASAP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Asking honestly... how do we do this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    I'm no strategist but: Primaries, local organizing with progressive supporters, and refusing to play the "civility politics" game that so many conservatives and neoliberals love to play. Be progressive and don't apologize for it.

    Do they ever apologize? No, they don't. We don't either.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    I think it's already happening. People are tired of the current leadership who have proven themselves deaf to the needs of the working class. They've just been stringing people along with performativism and virtue signaling, but people have definitely woken up to that in recent years.

    Also, establishment Dems' catastrophic failures in last election followed by a series of progressive wins is a good signal. Progressives are demonstrating their electability, and that momentum will only build from here on. It will become increasingly harder for Democratic Party leadership to stifle the progressive caucus.

    Also, the new DNC chairman is at least nominally progressive. We'll see how he does in two years. Till then all we can do is hope and wait and vote.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 67 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    In 1936, Roosevelt was elected despite millionaires pouring money into Hoover's campaign.

    Voting is important.

    https://www.americanheritage.com/1936-fifty-years-ago-2

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    If it wasn't, they wouldn't make it so hard to vote or try to stop you. It unfortunately isn't very effective when people are complacent. But when people are pissed, even stacked decks and rigging won't hold ultimately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    That's why perpetual whiplash is baked into the system. People get complacent when things are going good, which is when the opposition's momentum is at its strongest.

    4-8 years later the other side is the one that gets complacent as their opposition gets fired up.

    Rinse and repeat.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 4 months ago (70 children)

    The algorithm is simple. Watch who the billionaires back, then vote for the other option.

  • source
  • hideshow 70 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (69 children)

    Doesn't always work, Kamala had more billionaires backing her than trump .

    Unless you want to advocate voting for Stein, which is fine, you'll just have to deal with a large chunk of people here caling you a Russian bot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 69 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    A better rule of thumb is "who are the Zionist and Billionaires funding". Personally, I really dislike Platner. But when I see literally every Zionist group funding attack campaigns it really doesn't matter anymore. It's a single election. If I was in Maine, I'd go vote against what the Zionist clearly want.

    Does the chud betray us and turn into a Fetterman? Maybe. Maybe he has a stroke too. But I want Israel to stop getting bombs. I don't have to like Platner. But I am excited that a candidate that says he wants to stop weapons shipments to Israel is actually popular in a purple state like main. That is amazing. And no amount of virtue signaling will take that away from me.

    I've been fighting Zionism since I was in college in 2015. Platner winning would be good for the entire movement of the left. Even if he doesn't follow through. People don't want "it's complicated centrist". You don't have to compromise. You can win elections while being against the genocidal apartheid state. That is absolutely a win.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Careful with that nuance. People here don't like measured criticism of Platner

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    My concerns are that he's either lying about knowing it was a totenkopf or if he isn't that he's pretty stupid because a totenkopf isn't subtle, it's like the third or fourth most recognizable nazi symbol, and any tattoo shop that'll do a totenkopf is gonna have other nazi imagery around because that's a nazi shop, so he would have had to miss that too. So yeah he was either nazi adjacent or really dumb. Neither are good, but he likely can't be worse than Collins so he gets a benefit of the doubt. But I'm sorry if you get a totenkopf tattoo without somehow recognizing a prominent and exclusively nazi symbol then you're pretty goddamn stupid. It's not an obscure symbol, it's the goddamn death's head. You shouldn't even need history class, popular media should be enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    than Collins so he gets a benefit of the doubt. But I'm sorry if you get a totenkopf tattoo without somehow recognizing a prominent and exclusively nazi symbol then you're pretty goddamn stupid. It's not an obscure symbol, it's the goddamn death's head.

    Exactly. And the people here that are willing to say whatever they need to in order to deflect any criticism, regardless of how valid...

    Stop trying to fucking gaslight people into thinking this isn't a blatant Nazi symbol.

    I was literally told on here that I'm lying about knowing the symbol prior to the controversy. In their mind it's simply not possible for someone to be aware of the totenkopf. Unreal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    this is good to know. billionaires can play both sides and all candidates are susceptible to being a turncoat. ultimately it's maine choice and he has more to bring to the table.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    It's definitely not fine to vote for an Ableist like Stein who thinks you can cure autism with crystals

    Edit: apparently I have her mixed up with someone else

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Source?

    She graduated from harvard medical school and practiced medicine for 25 years before she entered politics, I sincerely doubt she believes either autism is a disease that can be cured or that crystals have anything to do with it.

    Meanwhile her platform on disability rights is leagues ahead of Kamala and the Dems

    You can hate Stein for being a spoiler, but there's no need to spread lies about her.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago*

    I can't find anything. I might be mixing her up with another green party candidate. Mb.

    At most I can find that she used to be anti-vax but has changed her position on that.

    As long as the electoral college exists Jill Stein can be a literal angel, Halo and wing span.. and it won't matter.

    Anyone who thinks voting third party will do anything is either a secret Republican or is hopelessly naive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago (53 children)

    Unless you want to advocate voting for Stein

    • Trump, an actual Russian asset and known pedophile with deep ties to a fascist tech oligarchs

    • Harris, an empty suit who took the nomination sans primary and immediately handed her campaign to the Cheney family

    • Jill Stein, a perennial fail candidate with no meaningful ties to anyone who mostly just campaigns on climate change and anti-war issues

    I mean, if you want the Harm Reduction Candidate, it's obviously Stein.

    But if you're heavily invested in partisan politics, you just vote straight ticket

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 53 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago (36 children)

    Jill Stein has run multiple Presidential campaigns, each one funded by the fucking Russians.

    IDK what the hell you're going on about, but you've completely missed the plot with that traitorous bitch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (35 children)

    she was investigated by the senate, and they found that she wasn't taking funding from russians. this is misinformation

    1. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (32 children)

    Bullshit. They proved she was a Russian asset.

    Here's a story of her campaigning in 2024 with Russian assets.

    https://democrats.org/news/icymi-jill-stein-to-campaign-today-with-alleged-russian-assets/

    Here's one from 2018 showing the Russians running a social media blitz on behalf of Jill Stein for President.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166

    SORRY BUT YOU'RE JUST WRONG, DUDE. SHE'S A FUCKING RUSSIAN PLANT AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago* (31 children)

    this is all insinuation and innuendo. what I said is the truth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (21 children)
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    this isn't proof she takes money or orders from russia

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (19 children)

    You don't sit at a dinner table with the Russian power structure for no reason. See Mike Flynn on the other side of it.

    https://abcnews.com/Politics/timeline-michael-flynns-interactions-russia-cost-job/story?id=45456031

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (18 children)

    she went there to celebrate the 25th anniversary of one of the few media outlets that didn't try to freeze her out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (17 children)

    And why would Russian media give an American a platform, hm? 😉

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (16 children)
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (15 children)

    Because she was actively working with Putin and the Russians. You don't get a seat at that table otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    this is jumping to conclusions, not based in fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (13 children)

    Replace Putin with Trump. Everyone around a Trump dinner table would be a Trump bootlicker.

    Same deal with Stein and Putin.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (12 children)

    she speaks out against Russias war. she's no bootlicker

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (11 children)

    Now you're just demonstrably lying:

    https://ballotpedia.org/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2016/Russia

    Jill Stein (G) said that she viewed Russians "not as enemies to conquer or resources to exploit, but as members of the global community whom we must deal with." She recommended that the U.S. "encourage Ukraine to be neutral" so that Russia would not "feel under attack."

    https://www.thirdway.org/memo/jill-stein-a-russian-asset-and-a-hypocrite

    "In 2015, Stein “recorded a video from Moscow’s famous Red Square, in which she talked about ‘the need to rein in American exceptionalism’ and replace ‘a U.S. policy based on domination’—words that sounded like they were ripped from Putin’s talking points.” – POLITICO (June 20, 2017). During the campaign of 2016, Stein “parroted the Russian position on Ukraine and criticized the U.S. for installing a government in Kiev ‘hostile to Russia.’” – NBC News (Dec. 22, 2018)

    She still sounds like a Russian propagandist: “Russia’s invasion was a provoked response to the bigger, more murderous and illegal game plan of US empire… In 2014 the US backed a coup in Ukraine led by far-right insurrectionists. The installation of the new government was a giant step towards the goal of adding Ukraine to NATO - and putting hostile bases and nuclear-capable missiles right on Russia's border.” – Jill Stein (Feb. 24, 2022)"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    showing quotes where she's not criticizing Russia isn't proof she doesn't criticize Russia. she called the invasion illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    And repeatedly parroted Putin calling Ukraine the aggressor. LOL.

    Like if I break into your house and call you the bad guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    if she's ever done that, you could prove this. she has never said that, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (7 children)

    Literally 3 comments ago... Here, let me make it easier for you:

    https://ballotpedia.org/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2016/Russia

    She recommended that the U.S. "encourage Ukraine to be neutral" so that Russia would not "feel under attack."

    Putin talking point.

    https://www.thirdway.org/memo/jill-stein-a-russian-asset-and-a-hypocrite

    she talked about ‘the need to rein in American exceptionalism’ and replace ‘a U.S. policy based on domination’

    Putin talking point.

    parroted the Russian position on Ukraine and criticized the U.S. for installing a government in Kiev ‘hostile to Russia.

    Putin talking point.

    “Russia’s invasion was a provoked response to the bigger, more murderous and illegal game plan of US empire… In 2014 the US backed a coup in Ukraine led by far-right insurrectionists. The installation of the new government was a giant step towards the goal of adding Ukraine to NATO - and putting hostile bases and nuclear-capable missiles right on Russia's border.”

    Putin talking point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    she never called Ukraine the aggressor, no matter how big you make your text

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

    Because non-aggressors are well known for wanting to attack. 🤣

    You're twisting yourself in a pretzel trying to avoid the obvious.

    Over and over Stein parroted Putin talking points, which is why the Russians helped her and why she was at dinner with Putin.

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

    she never said Ukraine wanted to attack, either. you're the one doing the twisting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

    Who ELSE has Russia invaded because they stated the victim was being the aggressor?

    Look, I know your name is "Commie" but you have a serious blind spot here.

    So when Stein said:

    https://uawire.org/news/jill-stein-the-us-helped-foment-a-coup-in-ukraine-where-ex-nazis-came-to-power

    “We should encourage Ukraine to be neutral; we helped foment a coup against a democratically-elected government, [resulting in a government] where ultra-nationalists and ex-Nazis came to power.”

    “So let's not be single-issue--instead of fomenting a hostile Ukraine we should be leading the way in establishing a neutral Ukraine that would allow Russia to not feel under attack,” Stein added.

    That isn't JUST Russian propoganda, those are direct talking points from Putin.

    But at this point you personally are a lost cause, it's been proved over and over again in this thread. This is purely a reply for posterity so anyone searching your history can bear witness to how thoroughly owned you are on this topic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    russia may say Ukraine is the aggressor, but Stein never has

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    What you said is technically treason. She's a traitor and by extension, so are her supporters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    if this were true she would have been hanged under the Democrats or Republicans who took office when she didn't beat them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    She's a useful idiot to the right-wing coup. She's the gift that keeps helping the fascists win. She helped Bush steal 2000 from Gore. She helped Trump steal 2016 and 2024 from the American people.

    Why would the rich get rid of her when she's 3 for 3 in helping you and them overthrow the Republic on behalf of billionaires?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Stein wasn't on the ballot in 2000, the Green candidate was Ralph Nader. Stein first appeared on the Presidential ballot in 2012.

    In the end, the Florida butterfly ballot had a bigger impact than Nader did.

    That being said, Gore lost his own home state. If he had won TN, Florida would not have mattered.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Gore won Florida. He literally got more votes than Bush.

    But the Governor of Florida was Bush's brother Jeb, and his people on the state Supreme Court gave the election to his brother, who again, won fewer votes than Mr Gore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    she ran against Trump in 2016 and 2024.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    It doesn't matter. They have a picture of her sitting at a dinner table that one time in 2015. So now she's basically FSB Western Hemisphere Commanding Officer for life.

    Facts simply do not influence their feelings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    Voting for Stein was basically voting for Trump

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago* (10 children)

    Is this like how voting for Gary Johnson is voting for Hilary?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Anything but voting for Hillary was voting for Trump

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    That's all well and good but it's known that non and third party voters get republicans elected and arguing with numpties who ignore that reality isn't worth it.

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

    non and third party voters get republicans elected

    When Trump was threatened by a JRK Jr third party run, he stretched out his hand and incorporated Kennedy into his administration - instantly capturing a 10% share of indie voters.

    When Hillary was threatened by an upstart primary challenger in 2008 and again in 2016, she responded by going scorched earth with smears and slanders.

    It seems that Republicans know how to integrate with independent voters, while Democrats only know how to scream and cry and blame them for their defeat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    It's funny, because the Russian communists did actually figure this shit out, while the Russian fascists all formed a circular firing squad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago*

    I mean, if you want the Harm Reduction Candidate, it's obviously Stein.

    Just a complete lack of understanding of US elections.

    Edit: never mind, I just saw the user name. No benefit of the doubt here, this is misinformation. You know exactly what you're saying.

    What's the end goal here? Accelerationism I guess? How's that working out for you

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    "But we need someone electable, someone both sides like!"

    Yeah no, the "both sides" these people are referring to is the defensive and offensive wing of the same group.

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

    You cant win elections appealing to "both sides".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    How do we/ why would we appeal to people who are literally a combination of mind-bogglingly corrupt Traitors, Racists, and Pedophiles? What kind of a compromise do you cut with them? They are only allowed to do a little graft, treason, racism, and child raping? Just regulate it, to keep it at a reasonable level?

    MAGA needs to be mercilessly crushed, and purged from our government and society. They don't get to contribute to the future of America. We allowed them to do that after the Civil War, and it led to this. We can't make that mistake again.

    MAGAs rise and reign has been ugly, and we need to make their decline and demise even uglier, so future generations will learn harsh lessons from it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 5 months ago

    Jesus Christ, Maine.

  • source
  • [+] 19 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 37 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago*

    When that health care CEO was executed, his company, and all the other health care companies temporarily eased up on their denials, and thousands of people got treatment who were previously denied. I've read of people who were going to die, until they suddenly got approved following the murder.

    Of course, they've gone back to business as usual, but that only demonstrates that we have to execute another CEO every few months. Maybe be strategic about it, and spread it around in different industries until they get their shit together.

    First handle a few health care guys until they clean it up, and stay there. Then maybe oil companies CEOs are next. Maybe pharmaceutical companies.

    Eventually, maybe we execute enough, that the business world decides to adopt a more moral stance towards money, one where they can still get rich, without being such shitheads that they eventually get set on fire in front of their families.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago

    BUT these Billionaires CARE about Us! THATS why they're FORCING us to Invest ALL OUR RETIREMENT into Their Companies so they can be Trillionaires!

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    7 comments in c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world view that post
    4 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    1 comment in c/pravda_news@news.abolish.capital view that post