Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.
Graham Platner FTW
14,792 Views |
201 Replies |
Last: 5 days ago by Cal88
Anarchistbear said:
Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.
Agreed. Plus I think Collins' expiration date is coming. Platner would be good for TV and comedians.
Anarchistbear said:
Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.
why can't Maine voters nominate a squeaky clean asexual McKinsey sociopath who would wear your skin like a wetsuit if it got them a promotion
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) May 31, 2026
Aunburdened said:Anarchistbear said:
Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.why can't Maine voters nominate a squeaky clean asexual McKinsey sociopath who would wear your skin like a wetsuit if it got them a promotion
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) May 31, 2026
Like Conor Lamb vs Fetterman
dajo9 said:Aunburdened said:Anarchistbear said:
Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.why can't Maine voters nominate a squeaky clean asexual McKinsey sociopath who would wear your skin like a wetsuit if it got them a promotion
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) May 31, 2026
Like Conor Lamb vs Fetterman
Fetterman lying his way into office is just standard Democrat candidate conduct.
Zero Democrats asked Andrew Cuomo to drop out. Zero media outlets spent weeks covering his history of sexual misconduct allegations. None of them gave his accusers the platform, they amplified every racist attack against Mamdani, framed him as worse than Cuomo, and then told…
— Ashleyy (@dontsippy) June 1, 2026
Republicans, can we please save the Platner posting until after June 9?
— Michael Knowles (@michaeljknowles) May 31, 2026
Anarchistbear said:
Platner loyalists are like Trump loyaltists. Personal foibles won't matter. Maine, however, has one of the oldest populations in the country, so who knows how it plays.
Platner could’ve sexted my mom and I’d still vote for him
— Secular Talk (KyleKulinskiShow@bsky.social) (@KyleKulinski) May 30, 2026
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?PAC-10-BEAR said:
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
save some dry powder bro. Dic pics and nazi tattoos may not be enough. Trump was a pu**y grabberPAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
he did fine. Who would have thunk?
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
Never before have I witnessed anything expose the left quite like this Platner controversy has. Platner is everything they’ve ever accused Trump of being but with a (D) after his name, and they’re twisting themselves into a pretzel trying to cover his ass so he can get elected… https://t.co/esVDYzdq3i
— Swag Jockey Fern (@GrantMa25066011) May 31, 2026
I don't think politicians realize how stupid they sound when they talk about "character." All humans are flawed, politicians as a group probably more so- the temptations of power, money and women are too enticing, see Epstein, Jeffrey. The corruption of politics is and always has been legendary.
Voters have a more nuanced view; primarily they want to know what a candidate can do to improve their material lives. If Platner succeeds it will be because of this. Nazi tattoos will be irrelevant.
This kind of fake moralizing is also encouraged by the equally corrupt media class who wants us to think " West Wing" is a model for the way things were, not a totally contrived fantasy.
Voters have a more nuanced view; primarily they want to know what a candidate can do to improve their material lives. If Platner succeeds it will be because of this. Nazi tattoos will be irrelevant.
This kind of fake moralizing is also encouraged by the equally corrupt media class who wants us to think " West Wing" is a model for the way things were, not a totally contrived fantasy.
Anarchistbear said:
The NYT in their search for "diversity" always hires the worst kind of Republican toads- David French, Brett Stephen's, David Brooks. All neocon warmongers and representatives of the extinct moderate Republican class, extinct everywhere but the old guard media. They should hire a MAGA columnist.
Who do people recommend as a MAGA columnist? I'm no fan of the NY Times or any of the people you mentioned but even the New York Times doesn't want to hire blatantly dishonest guys like John Solomon.
Anarchistbear said:
I don't think politicians realize how stupid they sound when they talk about "character." All humans are flawed, politicians as a group probably more so- the temptations of power, money and women are too enticing, see Epstein, Jeffrey. The corruption of politics is and always has been legendary.
Voters have a more nuanced view; primarily they want to know what a candidate can do to improve their material lives. If Platner succeeds it will be because of this. Nazi tattoos will be irrelevant.
This kind of fake moralizing is also encouraged by the equally corrupt media class who wants us to think " West Wing" is a model for the way things were, not a totally contrived fantasy.
I used to think like this. I viewed the "character" attack as just people the 1% liked vs. who they didn't like. Like when I rewatched the 1981 World Series a few years ago and they would show shots of baseball player wives. For all the white wives Howard Cosell would say something like, "a very classy lady" and for the black wives he said nothing.
But Trump has changed my views on the matter. In my opinion, his character and lack of decorum are disqualifying. I've never felt that way about a top-level American politician before. I would like to see America get back to requiring some level of character and decorum.
dajo9 said:Anarchistbear said:
The NYT in their search for "diversity" always hires the worst kind of Republican toads- David French, Brett Stephen's, David Brooks. All neocon warmongers and representatives of the extinct moderate Republican class, extinct everywhere but the old guard media. They should hire a MAGA columnist.
Who do people recommend as a MAGA columnist? I'm no fan of the NY Times or any of the people you mentioned but even the New York Times doesn't want to hire blatantly dishonest guys like John Solomon.
You like Rachel Maddow, so I don't see the issue with blatant dishonesty. You just care about what color pom poms they're shaking as they lie.
dajo9 said:Anarchistbear said:
I don't think politicians realize how stupid they sound when they talk about "character." All humans are flawed, politicians as a group probably more so- the temptations of power, money and women are too enticing, see Epstein, Jeffrey. The corruption of politics is and always has been legendary.
Voters have a more nuanced view; primarily they want to know what a candidate can do to improve their material lives. If Platner succeeds it will be because of this. Nazi tattoos will be irrelevant.
This kind of fake moralizing is also encouraged by the equally corrupt media class who wants us to think " West Wing" is a model for the way things were, not a totally contrived fantasy.
I used to think like this. I viewed the "character" attack as just people the 1% liked vs. who they didn't like. Like when I rewatched the 1981 World Series a few years ago and they would show shots of baseball player wives. For all the white wives Howard Cosell would say something like, "a very classy lady" and for the black wives he said nothing.
But Trump has changed my views on the matter. In my opinion, his character and lack of decorum are disqualifying. I've never felt that way about a top-level American politician before. I would like to see America get back to requiring some level of character and decorum.
What makes loyal Democrat voters so repulsive is that they don't care at all about our government doing bad things. They don't care about the bombs we drop, they don't care about what other countries do with the bombs we sell them, and they certainly don't care about any economic issues that don't affect them personally. All they care about is that the bad things are done by the politicians with the blue pom poms so that they can feel a fake moral superiority to the people that either don't vote, vote only for Republicans, or don't vote Democrat down the line consistently.
The people who finance these elections and are behind the Graham Platner smear campaign are the same people in the Epstein files and they've all done far worse things than he has done or will ever do and all they care about is protecting their wealth. They don't give a ******* about character. I don't doubt that Platner is typical of the people who get into politics and that his character should be disqualifying, but if character was actually disqualifying, they'd have to get rid of everyone in the federal government and start over from scratch. Trump is worse and I'm glad he can't run against after this term expires, but I care far more about the bad policies our government has and their lack of interest in representing their voters over their donors than I am about whether their level of decorum gives people like you a false sense of pride in their country that they shouldn't have if they were paying the least bit of attention to what our country actually does.
cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
save some dry powder bro. Dic pics and nazi tattoos may not be enough. Trump was a pu**y grabber
he did fine. Who would have thunk?
Platner confessed to grabbing his own pu**y in porta-potties.
To each his own?
it shall henceforth be referred to as his "Fuheur" dear sir!PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
save some dry powder bro. Dic pics and nazi tattoos may not be enough. Trump was a pu**y grabber
he did fine. Who would have thunk?
Platner confessed to grabbing his own pu**y in porta-potties.
To each his own?
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
Achtung, Mein Fueher
cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
save some dry powder bro. Dic pics and nazi tattoos may not be enough. Trump was a pu**y grabber
he did fine. Who would have thunk?
Platner confessed to grabbing his own pu**y in porta-potties.
To each his own?
it shall henceforth be referred to as his "Fuheur" dear sir!
Easy to see how Democrat voters get so easily propagandized when they believe stuff like that.
bluesky reacting to my piecehttps://t.co/D6ordvYb38
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) June 1, 2026
most things related to a political candidate's ***** can be used by both sides as a tool of propagandaAunburdened said:cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:PAC-10-BEAR said:cal83dls79 said:
did you read your own post? It said save your posts until the 9rh. And you said you didn't care. What does Corey Booker think?
It's getting better every day. We need Platner to win. lol.
save some dry powder bro. Dic pics and nazi tattoos may not be enough. Trump was a pu**y grabber
he did fine. Who would have thunk?
Platner confessed to grabbing his own pu**y in porta-potties.
To each his own?
it shall henceforth be referred to as his "Fuheur" dear sir!
Easy to see how Democrat voters get so easily propagandized when they believe stuff like that.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
👀 As fallout continues over Graham Platner's sexually explicit texts, Janet Mills is reminding folks she's still on the ballot:
— Mychael Schnell (@mychaelschnell) June 1, 2026
“People have the impression that I ‘withdrew’ or ‘dropped out,'” Mills (D) told @PressHerald, “but I simply suspended active campaigning. I am still…
Aunburdened said:dajo9 said:Anarchistbear said:
The NYT in their search for "diversity" always hires the worst kind of Republican toads- David French, Brett Stephen's, David Brooks. All neocon warmongers and representatives of the extinct moderate Republican class, extinct everywhere but the old guard media. They should hire a MAGA columnist.
Who do people recommend as a MAGA columnist? I'm no fan of the NY Times or any of the people you mentioned but even the New York Times doesn't want to hire blatantly dishonest guys like John Solomon.
You like Rachel Maddow, so I don't see the issue with blatant dishonesty. You just care about what color pom poms they're shaking as they lie.
You still haven't presented any actual Rachel Maddow lies
dajo9 said:Aunburdened said:dajo9 said:Anarchistbear said:
The NYT in their search for "diversity" always hires the worst kind of Republican toads- David French, Brett Stephen's, David Brooks. All neocon warmongers and representatives of the extinct moderate Republican class, extinct everywhere but the old guard media. They should hire a MAGA columnist.
Who do people recommend as a MAGA columnist? I'm no fan of the NY Times or any of the people you mentioned but even the New York Times doesn't want to hire blatantly dishonest guys like John Solomon.
You like Rachel Maddow, so I don't see the issue with blatant dishonesty. You just care about what color pom poms they're shaking as they lie.
You still haven't presented any actual Rachel Maddow lies
How about when she said "Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person." How about when she made claims that an ICE doctor was performing unnecessary hysterectomies. You can see other examples in the link below.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=rachel-maddow&utm_source
BearlySane88 said:dajo9 said:Aunburdened said:dajo9 said:Anarchistbear said:
The NYT in their search for "diversity" always hires the worst kind of Republican toads- David French, Brett Stephen's, David Brooks. All neocon warmongers and representatives of the extinct moderate Republican class, extinct everywhere but the old guard media. They should hire a MAGA columnist.
Who do people recommend as a MAGA columnist? I'm no fan of the NY Times or any of the people you mentioned but even the New York Times doesn't want to hire blatantly dishonest guys like John Solomon.
You like Rachel Maddow, so I don't see the issue with blatant dishonesty. You just care about what color pom poms they're shaking as they lie.
You still haven't presented any actual Rachel Maddow lies
How about when she said "Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person." How about when she made claims that an ICE doctor was performing unnecessary hysterectomies. You can see other examples in the link below.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=rachel-maddow&utm_source
You haven't recommended a MAGA journalist to write for the NY Times. Here is a rundown of prominent MAGA journalist John Solomon and his intentionally dishonest reporting. Who from your team should the NY Times give space to?
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/19/hill-john-solomon-failed-disclose-details-115976
Politifact often does a bad job. The claims against Maddow are pretty trivial. Sometimes wrong. For example, the 1 "pants on fire" rating is just wrong by politifact. Ohio does not require a transvaginal ultrasound but to get an abortion early (which is recommended), before an external ultrasound picks up a heartbeat, a transvaginal ultrasound would be needed. The mansplaining otherwise is in error.
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about things you deem trivial
BearlySane88 said:
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about trivial things.
You don't have any MAGA journalists worthy of the NY Times, do you?
dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about trivial things.
You don't have any MAGA journalists worthy of the NY Times, do you?
Not sure why you're even asking that but I don't read the NYT so I have no opinion. If I wanted to talk about the NYT, I would have responded to your post about it.
I responded to your post about Maddow and her lies. If you'd like to talk about that, instead of deflecting from the answers you don't like, let me know
BearlySane88 said:dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about trivial things.
You don't have any MAGA journalists worthy of the NY Times, do you?
Not sure why you're even asking that but I don't read the NYT so I have no opinion. If I wanted to talk about the NYT, I would have responded to your post about it.
I responded to your post about Maddow and her lies. If you'd like to talk about that, instead of deflecting from the answers you don't like, let me know
Maddow is great and has a great track record. Even the 1st false claim you posted noted that Maddow issued a correction.
Whataboutism is not a great argument. Nobody is perfect. The strategy of your side is to ignore the debates about the failings on your side and only engage on criticism of the other side. When confronted with the willful, coordinated, dishonesty of John Solomon you want to talk about the overstated hyperbole of Rachel Maddow. It's a weak approach. Like Trump is a weak President.
dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about trivial things.
You don't have any MAGA journalists worthy of the NY Times, do you?
Not sure why you're even asking that but I don't read the NYT so I have no opinion. If I wanted to talk about the NYT, I would have responded to your post about it.
I responded to your post about Maddow and her lies. If you'd like to talk about that, instead of deflecting from the answers you don't like, let me know
Maddow is great and has a great track record. Even the 1st false claim you posted noted that Maddow issued a correction.
Whataboutism is not a great argument. Nobody is perfect. The strategy of your side is to ignore the debates about the failings on your side and only engage on criticism of the other side. When confronted with the willful, coordinated, dishonesty of John Solomon you want to talk about the overstated hyperbole of Rachel Maddow. It's a weak approach. Like Trump is a weak President.
You seem to really want me to talk about John Solomon who I do not read or follow nor do I think I have ever mentioned. You mentioned not knowing what Maddow's lies were, I responded and told you. You changed the subject to avoid Maddow's lies and then accuse me of whataboutism? lol rich. Then throw in an obligatory "Trump sucks" sentence to wrap it all up. Classic.
BearlySane88 said:dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:dajo9 said:BearlySane88 said:
The two I mentioned specifically are hardly trivial but I see you're changing your stance now. Maddow does lie but only about trivial things.
You don't have any MAGA journalists worthy of the NY Times, do you?
Not sure why you're even asking that but I don't read the NYT so I have no opinion. If I wanted to talk about the NYT, I would have responded to your post about it.
I responded to your post about Maddow and her lies. If you'd like to talk about that, instead of deflecting from the answers you don't like, let me know
Maddow is great and has a great track record. Even the 1st false claim you posted noted that Maddow issued a correction.
Whataboutism is not a great argument. Nobody is perfect. The strategy of your side is to ignore the debates about the failings on your side and only engage on criticism of the other side. When confronted with the willful, coordinated, dishonesty of John Solomon you want to talk about the overstated hyperbole of Rachel Maddow. It's a weak approach. Like Trump is a weak President.
You seem to really want me to talk about John Solomon who I do not read or follow nor do I think I have ever mentioned. You mentioned not knowing what Maddow's lies were, I responded and told you. You changed the subject to avoid Maddow's lies and then accuse me of whataboutism? lol rich. Then throw in an obligatory "Trump sucks" sentence to wrap it all up. Classic.
I did talk about Maddow. I'm not hiding.
Trump-Russia Collusion Obsession (20172019): Maddow devoted massive airtime to suggesting Trump campaign collusion with Russia, including "continuing operation" theories, Kremlin-dictated talking points, and implications that Putin controlled Trump policy.
Steele Dossier Promotion: She heavily featured the unverified dossier (funded by Clinton allies) as credible intelligence. Much of it was later discredited or unproven; Washington Post's Erik Wemple noted she was "there for the bunkings, absent for the debunkings."
"Trump Never Encouraged Vaccinations" (2021): PolitiFact rated False her claim that Trump, as president, never encouraged Americans to get COVID vaccines. Trump did promote them publicly on multiple occasions.
Anything related to promoting the Russia collusion hoax and politicalization of Covid and vaccines, Maddow was there. She cried on air too.
Steele Dossier Promotion: She heavily featured the unverified dossier (funded by Clinton allies) as credible intelligence. Much of it was later discredited or unproven; Washington Post's Erik Wemple noted she was "there for the bunkings, absent for the debunkings."
"Trump Never Encouraged Vaccinations" (2021): PolitiFact rated False her claim that Trump, as president, never encouraged Americans to get COVID vaccines. Trump did promote them publicly on multiple occasions.
Anything related to promoting the Russia collusion hoax and politicalization of Covid and vaccines, Maddow was there. She cried on air too.
Thread was better when discussing the sexting and nazi tats and how Trump made it so we don't care about moral character anymore….plus it's the topic of the thread
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
Featured Stories
See All
TT Carr Returns To Bears For 2026-27 Season
by Joaquin Ruiz
Chase Hendricks, In His Words: Why I Chose Cal
by Bear Insider
Carter Vargas, In His Words: Why I Chose Cal
by Bear Insider