politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- 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.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
He really seems like a good dude. Maybe a bit aloof to some things, but his intent seems genuine. I don't know why people thought he was "done". He said he wasn't stopping, and he hasn't, which speaks to his character. His opponents are fucking AWFUL choices, not just for Maine, but for everyone.
Until he comes out and says some really dumb shit, I have no reason to believe he's not in it to win it, and his words are genuine. This isn't some Fetterman bullshit.
I think that more speaks to his past comments on sexual assault...
Actually Daira Smith-Rodriguez had a very similar platform and none of the baggage and is even in a union. Can't imagine why people didn't catch on to her.
Okay...the first bit you're taking so far out of context that I don't even know if you know what he said. It was a glib statement for sure, and maybe borderline insensitive. His clarifying statement (even 12 years ago) was that you have a bunch of fucked men being thrown through war, and not behaving like "gentlemen", so it's best to remove yourself from bad situations within those ranks. I'm paraphrasing, but his comments clarified what he was saying.
Second, I did watch some clips of Rodriguez. She's not a good candidate because she can't speak to ideas on the fly, future plans and thoughts, and just lacks charismatic ideation. She's just kind flat when speaking, like a standard do nothing candidate. I don't think that takes her to the finish line.
Most of what I've seen has been disingenuous reads or dismissing/ignoring/not even listening to Grahams explanations.
The hand wringing about reddit comments here, however, is especially interesting, only because the vast majority of big accounts here were also old timers in Reddit. Like, we remember the weird times. and some of the comments aren't defensive, and Graham hasn't defended them. but others are genuine and especially in their time and context, are what I would consider to be a fairly standard expected comment on a place like Reddit (or in our own way, here on Lemmy). Like I expect a misread from CNN talking head whose understanding of reddit are just NYT think pieces chewed into mash potatoe size bits and spit back into their heads. but this is Lemmy. most of us came from reddit, and the best of us were probably high if not very high impact commenters and posters (I know I was. I could reliably post on major subs knowing it would get to the front page if that sub and I knew how to comment to reliably either be the top comment or top response).
So when I see the lack of nuance here, I have to attribute it to something other than an understanding of what Internet culture is like, of what our culture is like I these spaces.
I agree, if you're saying that people are dismissing any of his explanations about anything at all and just going on the headlines.
Most of what I'm saying is that I've seen some very superficial/ knee-jerk level responses, but that specifically concerning the reddit comments (for example, Platners question in an Ask Reddit about black people and tipping), I would expect Lemmy/ Lemmings to have a more nuanced understanding of how these kinds of spaces operate. The tipping question in particular is a good example.
And when I see that lack of nuance (as is being demonstrated in this very thread), I have to interpret it as something other than an honest criticism of the content of the critique, because I don't accept that lemmings individually aren't capable of understanding that nuance. And so I therefor have to assume its in bad faith, because, here you and I (and others) are, on lemmy. You have to be pretty deep into the internet and these kinds of spaces to end up here.
Even in that example, he literally said he did not know why. He saw a thing that happened, he recognized a trend, and he thought he could ask about it. It wasn't a racially motivated ATTACK, and he wasn't denigrating black people.
He explained after he asked on Reddit, he had a black bartender explain to him the history of their feelings about it. His quote from the Pod Save America interview:
Link
And as you show here, these space on Reddit, are specifically for asking these kinds of question in a shame-free environment. Its the entire point.
Platner, like most of America, was born into a racist nation where racism is structurally built into society and implicit biases are baked into our psyche from the first moments we're imprinted upon as children. And if you can get a question, like the one Platner had, answered in a manner like his bartender friend answered: its literally is a solution to racism. Being able to ask question about a racist assumption, then to develop an understanding of why you had the question in the first place, Its literally how you change people from being racist to being anti-racist. And it works: Platner is an example of that.
And I should expect lemmings to have a better understanding of the roles spaces, like the one Platner asked the question in, have a role in changing peoples minds. In-fact, I refuse to accept that a typical lemming doesn't actually understand this, and so I reject their critique and choose to believe they are operating in bad faith.
Homie? You aren't doing a good job of defending him considering you are characterizing his statement as "It is their fault for being around those rapists"
And the rest is the bog standard "she just isn't charismatic" or "she laughs too much" that is always used to dismiss women. So... definitely painting a pic for why you are caping for the white nazi
Again, I'm not sure you even know what he said, because he didn't say that. You're throwing a quote in there, but I actually read the comments, and he didn't say that.
Second, I'm not defending, because even HE said some of his comments were indefensible, and posted by a person who was going through all kinds of horrible shit and had no wisdom around the subject.
Third, as every other talking points person has said, we need get past this bullshit where people are taken to the mat for somehow being different at an earlier point and place in time. We can't keep moving forward with this divided political shit and not believing in change, learning, improvement, or remorse from people in the party. That will only get you the same corporate candidates who have a "clean" chat for their entire lives because they've been preparing this moment. Those people are sociopaths or psychopaths who have carried this goal for decades to ensure they are clean as a whistle.
Lastly, yeah, people want an enthusiastic candidate, and I don't even mind her, but I think she seems like a nice person. She DOES NOT speak off the cuff about her thoughts about issues in any way that seems knowledgeable about issues, or having a connection to the issues her constituents are going through. I can't even find the videos I saw of her interviewing now to reference this, but she was asked directly about being a military contractor and working for the "industrial complex", and her answer was something like "Well that's how things work, and people need to get over it", which is like a "fuck you" to people who are against that.
I just don't think she's a very elective candidate because of her flat affect. It has nothing to with her being a woman. If she matched the same charisma of other female candidates in the party, then she should have stayed in the race, but she knows she doesn't, and she backed out. She just can't contend.
...
The ink on his celtic (allegedly purity) tattoo that covers up the totenkopf is still wet. He is hopefully still applying ointment every day. If he is in such a different place after just two weeks, who can possibly imagine what he might be doing in a whole month!
As opposed to nazis who were rocking the totenkopf back in September.
I am a firm believer that people be given a chance to change. I have seen absolutely nothing indicating that the Blackwater merc with a nazi tattoo did. In fact, back in early October he was outright lying about not knowing what his nazi tattoo was.
At best, we are looking at a Fetterman where he'll say whatever will get him elected, fuck over the country as a republican for six years, and then get a lobbyist gig. And, just a reminder: Fetterman was a piece of shit long before the stroke and it is well documented even on a fucking Anthony Bourdain show.
No. This is just yet another case of a really problematic white man being pushed above everything else and all defenses being "Well, boys will be boys". Because Women, POC, and LGBTQIA+ folk (among other)... really have no choice. The republican will ALWAYS be worse.
But if you want to suppress votes by running a nazi against fucking susan collins because it is just too hard to finish out the next six months of primary season?
The reality is that he probably IS a good candidate because... Maine is really fucking white and really fucking racist. It's "Upstate New York: The State". And... a fucking nazi probably isn't going to be much worse than collins. But I am not going to shut the fuck up about how "progressives" and "leftists" around the country can't stop glazing a god damned nazi and what that means for all of their "allies".
Daina Smith-Rodriguez is white.
Also, did you read his comments? Even his reddit comments were anger at inequality, lack of LGBTQ support, anti-racism...etc.
What are you even talking about in this comment?
Unintelligent purity tests like what you do are why we on the left are divided and can't win. We don't need your mentality on our side. You are divisive and unhelpful. You might as well just turn MAGA, because you have the same negative effect as voting for trump. We really don't need you.
If "don't have fucking nazi tattoos" is an "unintelligent purity test" then... holy fucking shit we are cooked.
and
Yeah. The side with the totenkapfs on their chest isn't my side. Which... is what you and many online leftists (as well as the DNC) are making abundantly clear to Women, People of Color, and our LGBTQIA+ "friends".
And, just because I can't resist
Actually, I think electing a nazi does a better job of supporting trump. Just saying.
you seem to want him to be a Nazi more than there is any evidence for him being a Nazi.
seems like you've got an axe to grind.
I mean... its a nazi. So more like an entrenching shovel to grind?
And folk wonder why women, people of color, and LGBTQIA+ folk tend to roll their eyes and distance themselves from Online Leftists.
Bruh it looks like the terminally online kettle has something to say.
Like, you making the accusation that Platner is a secret nazi does not a secret nazi Platner make. This was oppo research released to have this exact effect, targeted to operate on a person exactly like you. It was released in coordination with Mills announcement and Schumers endorsement to have maximum effect in stalling out/ pulling back Platners momentum.
So like, the oppo worked, on you.
Yeah no. The totenkopf that was on his chest for 20 years does that. And the whole Blackwater thing doesn't help. Nor does the homophobia.
Wait... the opposition has a time machine and were able to go back 20 years, drug him, tattoo a totenkopf on his chest, and then trick him from realizing it was there for the next 20 years? And they are wasting it on THIS?
If "the oppo"'s goal was to make me dislike a nazi and really prefer we not tell all our POC/LBGTQIA+/Women "allies" to fuck off because this is a man's world? Mission successful?
Intent does not change facts. And if you think it is so important to spite the facsists by electing a nazi to the Senate...
It is interesting to watch how these kinds of programs operate on, and who they use to do their work.
Lol, white guy refusing to back down after being caught out as a bigot, ‘character.’
Explain what you just said
Seems pretty obvious. He’s admitted to making racist, anti-semetic, anti-gay, and anti-trans statements. And yet he refuses to back down after admitting to all of that somehow shows his ‘character.’
The guy has a litany of reasons to not support him, or trust him. A pile of reasons to think he is of bad character and morals. But ‘he tells it like is,’ so y’all refuse to condemn him. Sounds like Trump supporters to me, always denying his previous transgressions and saying you believe he’s gonna turn it around.
No, he did not.
Link to those please.
https://wgme.com/news/local/graham-platner-asked-why-black-people-dont-tip-and-referenced-rape-in-old-reddit-posts-social-media-maine-democrats-senate-race-republicans-susan-collins-janet-mills
https://www.advocate.com/politics/graham-platner-homophobic-posts
Literally, NOT what you are claiming. You are just mentioning a link about someone else mentioning a reddit comment with zero clarifying comments or Platner himself being asked to clarify or comment on them...
https://www.metroweekly.com/2025/10/graham-platner-apologizes-anti-lgbtq-posts/
Edit- are you seriously saying we need clarification on him asking why a race doesn’t tip?