PAC-10-BEAR said:Cal88 said:
The timing of this and the tens of millions of dollars arrayed against him feel like this is a setup, I would wait for more details about this latest allegation.
The Democrats have a history of "selecting" their candidates.
Obama over Hillary.
Biden over Bernie.
Kamala over Biden.
sycasey said:PAC-10-BEAR said:Cal88 said:
The timing of this and the tens of millions of dollars arrayed against him feel like this is a setup, I would wait for more details about this latest allegation.
The Democrats have a history of "selecting" their candidates.
Obama over Hillary.
Biden over Bernie.
Kamala over Biden.
How does Obama fit here? Hillary had more party support when that campaign began. Voters chose him.
BearlySane88 said:Ooooooooof this Community Note is Brutal! Ro Khanna @RoKhanna and all the Democrats are full of shit you guys doubled, and triple down on the Nazi Graham Platner ! We gave you a chance after chance and you blew it! This is your party you guys love creepy pervs like Anthony Weiner… pic.twitter.com/vAHia5gcGW
— April Silverman (@CaliMAGABarbie) July 6, 2026
Some of you are awfullyyyyyy quiet on this right now.
I know I'm old-fashioned this way, but I still think due process is the best way (ie: the only reliable way) to determine guilt and the truth of accusations.
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 7, 2026
Online mobs and trial by media are infinitely more unreliable for all sorts of reasons that should be obvious.
GhostRideTheCart said:DiabloWags said:
The ignore feature sure is paying off today.
I would urge a lot of you to start using this feature to avoid getting involved in petty and pedantic "tit for tat".
Believe it or not, I have been able to ignore 17 posts on this ONE page alone.
Ignore the emoticon. You posting about it is viewed as pedantic and tit for that.
DiabloWags said:
DiabloWags said:
I'm not impressed with the way that sock puppets are allowed to post on this platform.
Clearly a violation of ToS.
PAC-10-BEAR said:sycasey said:PAC-10-BEAR said:Cal88 said:
The timing of this and the tens of millions of dollars arrayed against him feel like this is a setup, I would wait for more details about this latest allegation.
The Democrats have a history of "selecting" their candidates.
Obama over Hillary.
Biden over Bernie.
Kamala over Biden.
How does Obama fit here? Hillary had more party support when that campaign began. Voters chose him.
You can call it an organic grassroots movement from Obama's side but aggressive, cutthroat tactics, media manipulation, and political "dirty tricks" were involved such as states breaking DNC rules by moving their primaries forward into to gain more political leverage.
Let me know if my Graham Platner apology is debasing and self-flagellating enough 👇https://t.co/VlN6iulpls
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) July 7, 2026
Exclusive: An ex-girlfriend of Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent during sex.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2026
Lyndsey Fifield is the second woman this week to allege that Platner engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct.…
Anarchistbear said:Exclusive: An ex-girlfriend of Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent during sex.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2026
Lyndsey Fifield is the second woman this week to allege that Platner engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct.…
This is getting to be some kind of feminist puritanical tale.
Platner should run. Every man and woman his age woke up one Sunday morning and wondered what happened last night. They don't wait five years and guess.
Aunburdened said:Anarchistbear said:Exclusive: An ex-girlfriend of Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent during sex.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2026
Lyndsey Fifield is the second woman this week to allege that Platner engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct.…
This is getting to be some kind of feminist puritanical tale.
Platner should run. Every man and woman his age woke up one Sunday morning and wondered what happened last night. They don't wait five years and guess.
I guess they'll just run new allegations from this woman every so often and pretend she's a new accuser
Anarchistbear said:Aunburdened said:Anarchistbear said:Exclusive: An ex-girlfriend of Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent during sex.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2026
Lyndsey Fifield is the second woman this week to allege that Platner engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct.…
This is getting to be some kind of feminist puritanical tale.
Platner should run. Every man and woman his age woke up one Sunday morning and wondered what happened last night. They don't wait five years and guess.
I guess they'll just run new allegations from this woman every so often and pretend she's a new accuser
He "repeatedly" took off the condom and she kept coming back for more.
BearlySane88 said:Tedhead94 the II said:BearlySane88 said:Ooooooooof this Community Note is Brutal! Ro Khanna @RoKhanna and all the Democrats are full of shit you guys doubled, and triple down on the Nazi Graham Platner ! We gave you a chance after chance and you blew it! This is your party you guys love creepy pervs like Anthony Weiner… pic.twitter.com/vAHia5gcGW
— April Silverman (@CaliMAGABarbie) July 6, 2026
Some of you are awfullyyyyyy quiet on this right now.
It's actually being covered by what you call the main stream media. It's actually getting bad press. He is a ******bag. He also needs therapy. Agreed……. So now try and see if you can get the Fox's and Jesse Waters' of the world, OH and you too of course, to agree to do the same on your end. As bad as it is for Plantner he is still a rookie league level ****** bag compared to Trump.
I love the cope.
Anarchistbear said:Exclusive: An ex-girlfriend of Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent during sex.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 7, 2026
Lyndsey Fifield is the second woman this week to allege that Platner engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct.…
This is getting to be some kind of feminist puritanical tale.
Platner should run. Every man and woman his age woke up one Sunday morning and wondered what happened last night. They don't wait five years and guess.
Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
Tedhead94 the II said:BearlySane88 said:Tedhead94 the II said:BearlySane88 said:Ooooooooof this Community Note is Brutal! Ro Khanna @RoKhanna and all the Democrats are full of shit you guys doubled, and triple down on the Nazi Graham Platner ! We gave you a chance after chance and you blew it! This is your party you guys love creepy pervs like Anthony Weiner… pic.twitter.com/vAHia5gcGW
— April Silverman (@CaliMAGABarbie) July 6, 2026
Some of you are awfullyyyyyy quiet on this right now.
It's actually being covered by what you call the main stream media. It's actually getting bad press. He is a ******bag. He also needs therapy. Agreed……. So now try and see if you can get the Fox's and Jesse Waters' of the world, OH and you too of course, to agree to do the same on your end. As bad as it is for Plantner he is still a rookie league level ****** bag compared to Trump.
I love the cope.
This is a problem being dealt with. Too much RWTwitter crack for you. If he were a R he would be the second coming of Jesus.
Aunburdened said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
It's risible that you pretend there wasn't plenty of smearing that was going on long before the Democratic primary.
Update from Maine Democratic Party Executive Director Devon Murphy-Anderson on the Maine Senate race. pic.twitter.com/Jzj9ofinU8
— Maine Democrats (@MaineDems) July 8, 2026
sycasey said:Aunburdened said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
It's risible that you pretend there wasn't plenty of smearing that was going on long before the Democratic primary.
I don't believe I ever said that. I don't think the attacks were at this level, though.
wifeisafurd said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
It's risible that you pretend there wasn't plenty of smearing that was going on long before the Democratic primary.
I don't believe I ever said that. I don't think the attacks were at this level, though.
The reason Platner lasted so long was (i) Gold didn't start a favorable thread for him, thus avoiding the infamous Gold Curse, and (2) Mills didn't call-up Katie Porter to learn how to properly leak titillating sexual conduct.
BearlySane88 said:Update from Maine Democratic Party Executive Director Devon Murphy-Anderson on the Maine Senate race. pic.twitter.com/Jzj9ofinU8
— Maine Democrats (@MaineDems) July 8, 2026
SBGold said:
Personal late night attack my dawg?
Wow
sycasey said:wifeisafurd said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
It's risible that you pretend there wasn't plenty of smearing that was going on long before the Democratic primary.
I don't believe I ever said that. I don't think the attacks were at this level, though.
The reason Platner lasted so long was (i) Gold didn't start a favorable thread for him, thus avoiding the infamous Gold Curse, and (2) Mills didn't call-up Katie Porter to learn how to properly leak titillating sexual conduct.
Kinda feels like Mills didn't really want the position all that badly.
I wouldn't be surprised if Bellows, the current sec of state, is the nominee. She is from Hancock county, went to Middlebury and has a tat of a puffin you know where. Bellows all the way!wifeisafurd said:sycasey said:wifeisafurd said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:sycasey said:Aunburdened said:
The hilarious thing about people complaining that Platner was insufficiently vetted is that he ran in the state of Maine with zero support from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party vets their milquetoast, genocide-loving, war supporting, affordable health-care opposing, Orange Man Bad candidates that they install as the preferred candidate. There was no such process for Platner because the Democrats never wanted him to run in the first place. Instead, they cast a wide net to look for as much stuff as they can to smear him and get him out of the race because he supports policies people actually want and opposes all the policies that the Democrats want, but sometimes pretend they support.
It would have been far easier for the Democrats to just vet their own preferred candidate that has a popular platform, but instead they ran another near-octogenarian that had no popular policies and excited nearly nobody.
Anybody can register to run for an office and be on the ballot if they have enough signatures. There is no vetting requirement and political parties are only invested in their preferred candidate. The rest are on their own.
If you have a problem with Platner getting past the primary process, take it up with the party that didn't give a compelling alternative to Platner.
Yup, if there is a problem with how "The Party" handled this it's the same as how we got Hillary in '16 and Kamala in '24 (sort of): everyone deciding to just "clear the field" and run the candidate that we just know will be the best one anyway. Schumer picked Mills and everyone else with any experience in Maine politics got out of the way. Well, it turns out Mills sucked and the only alternative was an untested guy like Platner. It's time to stop being afraid of competitive primaries.
None of this ever being leveraged by the Mills campaign in trying to beat Platner is pure electoral incompetence.
It's risible that you pretend there wasn't plenty of smearing that was going on long before the Democratic primary.
I don't believe I ever said that. I don't think the attacks were at this level, though.
The reason Platner lasted so long was (i) Gold didn't start a favorable thread for him, thus avoiding the infamous Gold Curse, and (2) Mills didn't call-up Katie Porter to learn how to properly leak titillating sexual conduct.
Kinda feels like Mills didn't really want the position all that badly.
Nor apparently does she want to be considered as a replacement for Platner now. Likely one of two guys who were unsuccessful candidates for Governor and Senate in the Democratic primary who are both progressive, or a woman who is the present Secretary of State, who leans somewhat progressive.
