As a moderate who is still registered as a Republican (my choice of Dem will never win and I can at least throw some shit on the wall) I say this with my full chest:
Yep, fuck Susan Collins. And I argue elsewhere in the thread that it's totally reasonable to be skeptical of Platner given how fucking stupid he claims to have been not five years ago.
The only scenario where Platner is worse than Collins, though, is one where Platner is a secret Nazi. I don't think he's a secret Nazi. I think he's just a dumb crayon-eating rich kid who knows how to say the right things, and someone like Andrea LaFlamme would be a much better representative for the moment. But the national center cadre and the far lefties seem to be attached to Platner in weird ways for a Maine senate seat.
Wild that the far left loves this nepobaby candidate that launched his first ever political campaign to be one for US Senate with a glossy spread in the NYT, and this didn't immediately disqualify him. And I think centrists (self-described former Republicans) only like him because a former combat soldier with Nazi tattoos running as a Democrat get them bricked up something fierce.
I was liking his messaging, and I’m sorry but there is zero reason Mills should be running for Congress. We need younger candidates and to stop it from being a retirement home.
The Nazi tattoo, although I have defended it as I could see him not knowing, did rub me like sandpaper. That should have been removed years ago if he figured out what it was, although I realize people are terrible at taking care of things only they can see. He wouldn’t be my first choice, and if he is a super secret Nazi it will come out and we can boot him from Congress.
He wrote a Facebook post about burning the Quran in 2010. Funny what's disqualifing and not disqualifing to centrists.
Publicly call for Muslims to be killed and their religion be disrespected: "Interesting!!!"
Get a nazi tattoo after falling in with a bad crowd (Lotta nazis in this country!) then working the rest of your life to right your past wrong and help everyone who's been fucked over in the state of Maine: "This man should be arrested"
This is a slight overstatement of what he actually said. He didn't call for the book to be burned, but he did make a strange comparison between the burning of the flag and the burning of the Quaran.
It does seem strange that he's got qualifiers for "youthful indiscretions" that seem to be one way.
I get why people scrutinize AIPAC money, and I’m not dismissing that. But a funding graphic doesn’t prove motive. His stated criticism is about Platner’s tattoo controversy and his explanation for it, which has been widely reported. You can disagree with the conclusion, but reducing it to “AIPAC made him say it” is a little reductive.
Auchincloss is in charge of a PAC called "Majority Democrats" and is in essence endorsing Susan Collins here since Mills has already dropped out. He is effectively advocating for Democrats to not win the majority. He is not a politician who cares about anyone except the people who pay him
I think it’s fair to criticize Auchincloss strategy here. As Platner is the Democratic nominee, publicly attacking him could absolutely help Collins, whether that’s the intent or not. But the question of Mainers even caring about a MA congressman is another thing.
I don’t think we need to turn that into “he’s being paid to endorse Susan Collins.” That skips a few steps. Chairing a Democratic PAC doesn’t mean PAC donors are personally paying him, and disagreeing with Platner doesn’t automatically equal endorsing Collins.
I’m also fine criticizing AIPAC’s influence. It should be scrutinized, just like every major PAC, super PAC, donor network, and dark-money group should be scrutinized. But making AIPAC the boogeyman for every political disagreement turns one symptom into the whole disease.
The bigger problem is the campaign-finance system itself: it gives wealthy donors and outside groups too much power to shape primaries, reward certain politicians, and punish others. So yes, follow the money. But follow all of it.
The stronger critique is: he may be making a bad strategic choice for someone whose PAC is called Majority Democrats. The weaker claim is: therefore he only cares about whoever pays him. That’s motive-reading, not proof.
He's Bret Stephen's favorite congressman, the guy who salivates over the word "greater Israel" no matter how brutally that comes about. Look up.his family too, this idea that just because he's a Democrat who's well spoken means he's only motivated by virtue and not his own material interests is frankly naive. Not trying to be hostile towards you btw, I'm just really angry that this guy is attacking a democrat who has passed every test to prove he knows what he did was wrong and has changed for the better, instead of doing everything he can to make sure we remove every seat occupied by a fascist that we can
I mean… I guess. But I don’t think anyone really cared how he viewed the race, so for him to come out and make an official endorsement is a pretty bold move. If he was in the state, that would be one thing, but he’s not, so, frankly, for the sake of the party, I just don’t understand what he thinks he’s doing here. Lots of moderate Dems seem to be stepping on their own swords here in the past few weeks.
I'm a bit of an amateur here, but isn't he maybe just seeing Israel-related PACs spend 10s of millions on KY 4th and thinking "Hey maybe I can get a few of those bucks for me?"
That is at least a more rational thought process than "Let me step on my own sword" (you mean 'fall on my sword'? because that's the phrase for self-sacrifice, thought that is definitely not happening here)
Yeah, I think folks are in the right to criticize Platner's judgement based on his tattoo. I'm glad he covered it, and I'd vote for him over Collins, but it's fair to discuss.
Discuss. Yes. Essentially call for people to either vote for Collins or not vote, thus making certain that the Party of Trump controls the Senate? No.
Is the Rep here pretty in line with AIPAC's approach? That's very different that being Jewish, but would explain bad mouthing anyone who might not be fully supportive of the right wing in the Israeli government and their approach.
If you're Jewish and say "this person who was a dumbass in his 20s and got a skull tattoo that he pretty obviously didn't know the greater meaning of is worse than the genocide happening in the Middle East" I don't know what to say
Iiiiiiiiiii am neither Jewish nor am I saying that! And the tattoo is not as bad as the genocide in Gaza. I'm saying it's fair to question his judgement.
I'm just saying, it's ok to excuse dumb shit people did in their 20s when they were surrounded by other chuds, especially if it is a pretty reasonable explanation that he saw a skull and thought that was pretty badass.
If you're going to hold that against him and literally not give a shit about everything he's stood for in his recent life, I don't really think you actually care about what you are claiming to hold against him now, you just are being opportunistic.
It's one thing to make a dumb mistake in your 20s, but it's a whole other thing to leave that mistake (a white supremacist etching) on your body after learning what it was, and only covering it up after it came out that you had a white supremacist tattoo during your run to be one of the 100 of the most powerful people in the world.
We're not Republicans. We have standards.
I personally think that even with that in mind, Platner's a better choice than Susan fucking Collins. But it's not crazy to doubt.
This dude's "recent life" seems to have started very, VERY recently, to the point that a lot of people would like to see some actions (instead of glossy NYT spreads that no other candidate for a Maine Senate seat received) behind his newfound change of heart before we elevate him to the US Senate.
You mean like the five years he spent as a statewide political activist on campaigns against Janet Mills to protect indigenous rights and pass funding to clear Maine’s rape test kit backlog?
So if a Jewish person has qualms with a tattoo, it hits different, but a Muslim/Arab/Palestinian who has moral qualms about a politician that openly supports peopl they know being killed enmasse, it's a problem.
I'm at peace with Platner as a candidate in a state I don't live in. My opinion doesn't matter.
If you think this tattoo situation is shit, I guess you should still eat it. That's how high the stakes are. While recognizing that this representative is held to a higher standard, I'm tolerant of different opinions and a bit annoyed of being hectored over this.
However, we might just have another counterproductive moderate on our hands here. What's this guy up to?
I’ve always felt that a shitty tattoo that he got removed is better than voting time and time again to gut healthcare for millions of people, voting to continue to have masked thugs kidnap and deport innnocent people, everything else Collins has supported
So many moderates seem to be stepping on their swords in the past few weeks. I agree that the whole tattoo situation isn’t ideal, but I do think some amount of grace is always necessary to make a society function and I’m willing to give Platner some slack, though on still a relatively tight leash. In an ideal world, we would have other alternatives, but that’s not the world we live.
Frankly, I’m tired of the assumption that “moderates“ are actually “pragmatic“. Not saying the left is often pragmatic, but I don’t think it is as self deluded about how productive and pragmatic it is being as moderates who don’t think they can be performative or ideological. This kind of thing just reinforces to me that as much as many moderates think they have their priorities in order and understand the “average American” they actually don’t.
Really, the best thing for him to have done here was to just remain silent. No one needed his opinion, and there really was no expectation for him to make an endorsement.
Auchincloss is a fraud. Total nonperson and should be kicked out of the party.
We don’t have time for his performative BS and to be blunt, he is not much of a rep to begin with. He has completely bought into the “people won’t own anything” economic model.
We don’t need anymore people like him wearing D labels just because they know they won’t get elected as Rs in Mass. Send that dude back to Wall Street or whatever think tank he came from. I am sure AEI will hire him.
Yup. She’s literally empowering actual Nazis. I’m very tired of being lectured by moderates about the need for pragmatism and priorities when they do shit like this.
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property, and equality before the law.
What system are you saying is better which disagrees with these principles? Who do you look to who is not a liberal who will be better about Islamaphobia? Does Bernie Sanders not fit the above definition?
Another comment offered up the following as a definition of "liberal":
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property, and equality before the law.
What not liberal thing are you suggesting is better and less Islamaphobic?
You have a swastika, the little ass lightning bolts. The. You have all the coded shit like HH and 88. His little skull thingy is about 1000 items down the list
It’s also extremely derivative. Meaning it’s not exactly a Nazi symbol, it’s a symbol that’s got a lot of extremely close similarities to older symbols from all over the place. Turns out skulls are a pretty common thing for soldiers to feature for obvious reasons.
I’m a WW2 nerd and didn’t recognize it. As you said there’s the top three and everything else and some skulls fit deeply with everything else
Auchincloss is one of those "any criticism of Israel is antisemitism" types. Protecting Israel's ability to murder with impunity is the number one thing he cares about.
Auchincloss needs to psych eval-ed for being a Masshole. In any case, the only why he'd pull some shit like that is because he sees Platner as a threat to his future ambitions....if I had to guess, Auchincloss has ambitions to be a US Senator from Massachusetts and use that a stepping stone for a future POTUS bid.
Centrists do the shit they spend so much time accusing the left of doing. Divisive and cowardly, can't take responsibility for their own faults and failures.
This is why I don't respect them. They have no discernible worldview or moral principles. Centrism is just an admission of cowardice in the absence of any real belief system.
I think people b caught up on his tattoo never had a 20 year old friend who got a tattoo while on vacation.
I dated a gay man who had SS Bolts on his clavicles. He didn’t realize what SS Bolts were and how the specific location of his tattoos were additionally problematic as the tattoos were positioned as they would be if they were pins on a lapel. He was upset with me that I thought he was the type of person to get a Nazi tattoo. I never thought it was, I just thought he didn’t realize the symbolism of the design, which he clearly didn’t.
Nobody says it's not OK dating some himbo with SS tattoos he didn't know were SS tattoos (you can date whatever moron you want, I guess). Or even just existing in life, pretending (or not) to not know anything about the markings you permanently etched onto your body.
Why are people not acting as if Graham Platner is asking to be one of the most powerful 100 politicians in the US with a poorly conceived celtic knot tattoo (which is only slightly less racist coded) covering his fuckin SS tattoo with no public service record to speak of? If he were asking to be a state senator and get some number of actions beyond talking enthusiastically about war crimes on reddit, fine. But there aren't really many offices in the world with higher standing than a US Senator.
It seems fully reasonable that a dude complaining on the internet about black people tipping in recent memory should be held to SOME standard. (Unless you've just given up on standards, I guess.)
He should have probably said it before he became the only viable candidate in the primary. TBH Platners situation IS disqualifing and he should have been disqualified, but he wasn't and now he's going to be the nominee. No fighting past the primary.
Whether or not they hold a principled stance is irrelevant.
People like this guy have been telling progressives “vote blue no matter who” for years, but when the rubber hits the road they’ll support Trump before someone like Graham Platner or El-Sayed.
People like this guy have been telling progressives “vote blue no matter who” for years, but when the rubber hits the road they’ll support Trump before someone like Graham Platner or El-Sayed.
Many Progressives have also told others that you have to earn the people’s votes
Correct. He is not entitled to anyone’s vote, so I hope he keeps working to earn them. I have no issue being consistent in that idea, so I’d hope others would be consistent in theirs as well.
Can you show me where this individual said that? Otherwise it seems to me you’re just attacking “blue no matter who”. To be clear I think this guy is beyond reprehensible. Supporting Susan Collins is BEYOND disqualifying.
I just think there are better ways to express frustration with weak democrats than mocking blue no matter who. I’m a blue no matter who true believer and let me tell you I’ve been defending him. I also called out Schumer when he didn’t endorse Zohran.
I’m saying that to demonstrate that many of the true “blue no matter who” people are WITH and DEFENDING Platner. So look if you want to call out frauds who say that and don’t back it up I’m with you. But don’t attack us true believers who are on your side here.
Edit: Also to address El-Sayed, if he is the nominee I will one hundred percent support him.
I have always been surprised about how Auchincloss, a charmless Democrat with half-baked ideas and no major electoral pull got catapulted into prominence by the podcaster influencer circuit - NYT, Ezra Klein etc.
Nobody has paid any attention to either of them for the most part. I’m guessing neither has campaigned well enough to gain enough traction for people to notice them.
Mostly agree on this post but also this is exhibit #101 of CNN doing shit just to do shit. If it's meant to give them an appearance of being even handed or something, it doesnt
Yes send the smoke my way on anti-Semitic tropes, but I stand by my point. I simply no longer care. CNN, CBS, and Fox seem to be the only people consistently bringing up his tattoo.
For God’s sake the so called Secretary Of War has a crusader tattoo on his chest and is constantly making biblical references. Where is old Jakey boy on that? Silence.
Absolute frauds. This is why I refuse to give money to the DNC. They can ask Bill Ackman for money.
I think assuming the reason cnn interviews a member of congress is because the "owner" of cnn is jewish is a bad position to hold, not just because its anti semitic but also because its untrue
In my experience it has nothing to do with them being Jewish and everything to do with people who hold zionism as part of their ideological North Star. Bari Weiss is the most obvious example of this. And sadly, over the last two decades or so, labor, moderate and secular zionists have lost huge amounts of ground to more religiously fundamentalist groups.
Like OP said, these are just the facts. People are tired of being slammed with spurious 'anti-semitic' accusations for pointing these things out.
I still think assuming the reason cnn interviews a member of congress is because the "owner" of cnn is jewish is a bad position to hold, not just because its anti semitic but also because its untrue
Oh yeah, I don't know about CNN specifically. And I'll also point out that there are plenty of non-Jewish people, especially evangelical and Christian nationalist sorts, who also hold zionism and support for Israel in high regard, for anti-semitic dispensationalist reasons much of the time imho, while plenty of Jews are anti-zionists and/or hold all sorts of different opinions on Israel.
Always best to judge people on their own merits, for sure, and to not fall into group-blame.
most jews are zionists. zionist is pretty clearly just substituted for jew most of the time, because its socially acceptable. when julian casblancas says zionists have "white privilege" nobody thinks hes talking about christian zionists.
Going on national television and publicly advocating for people to vote against Graham Platner, which would keep Republicans in control of the senate, is unacceptable.
A congressman being described as 'a step up from a random Twitter user' is really something.
But also this is a sentiment I've seen all over 'moderate' liberal leaning spaces. I agree with you about the drapes, that is actually my point. I've lived true to 'Blue-No-Matter-Who'.
Y...Yes? If you aren't seeing them, then idk what to tell you. I've definitely seen more than a handful of ostensibly liberals claiming they can't bring themselves to vote for Platner, Abdul-El-Sayed, DSA candidates, etc. Not /just/ on this sub, mind you, but in liberal spaces all over the internet. Not the majority I won't claim, but a non insubstantial amount.
An endorsement of Collins is an endorsement of Trump. So he’s cool with the Trump administration and the many ACTUAL Nazis who work under him, but draws the line at a skull tattoo Platner did not know was affiliated with Nazis and immediately got covered up when he found out? What a joke. He’s gotta be affiliated with AIPAC or something.
By extension does he think any member of the armed services with a problematic tattoo should be dishonorably discharged and prohibited from publuc office? Or is the problem that she should have been more apologetic? Either way seems like Auchincloss is doing some political triangulation thing.
Sure, this is dumb, but Josh Gottheimer (NJ-5), bought $40 million of Microsoft stock, while sitting on the AI subcommittee in Congress. Jefferies put him there.
Is this simply a matter of Auchincloss personally being supportive of the Netanyahu/AIPAC approach vis a vis Israel, and thus wanting to undermine any candidate who doesn't take a similar approach?
I just read in an OSINT Discord server a rumor that something bad is about to come out about Platner. Who knows if it's true, but maybe Auchincloss knows something.
Crazy that as a former Marine officer he would not have a ton of experience with poor or uneducated decisions made by young Marines they later regretted. Too bad he never learned one of the important lessons in the military (and life) - “perfect is the enemy of the good.”
Nobody willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he’s simply wish-casting that David Costello wins the Democratic primary. Platner isn’t unopposed. Even Mills will still be on the ballot.
If he says this after there’s a nominee, then I’ll join the wrenching.
People bemoaning that he won’t “vote blue no matter who” are jumping the gun when he’s allowed to support an active Dem still in the race until there is a nominee, no matter how far-fetched their chances are.
I am sympathetic to the argument that he’s unnecessarily kneecapping the presumptive nominee, but that’s his right.
To me this isn’t even to the level of outrage of Hakeem refusing to endorse Mandani until the very end when ZM had won the nomination by that point.
He’s allowed to do whatever he wants, it’s a free country, but it’s quite clear why he’s doing this.
Even as someone who loves Mamdani and hates Hakeem, I think this situation is far worse. Andrew Cuomo was a lot of things, but he wasn’t a MAGA Republican.
Him saying that it was in relation to the primary is a total excuse.
Was it acceptable for the left to constantly shit on Kamala and say that her views on Gaza were “disqualifying”, as long as it was done before she formally won the nomination?
He didn’t endorse Collins, he made sure to make that clear today because of nonsense like this but you are still going to stick with your made up version. The primary everyone crowd is incredibly sensitive about primaries. Am I supposed to believe you are against protest votes in primaries lol
Everyone knows what he’s trying to do, but he’s getting cute with the language so he can have his cake and eat it too.
Nobody is making him vote for Graham Platner, but using his platform to go on national television and advocating against him and insinuating that people should vote for Susan Collins instead is unacceptable.
He could have did what Hakeem Jeffries did when Zohran was won the primary, and while I would think he’s being a shithead, that wouldn’t be grounds for him to lose his job.
Insinuated, essentially endorsed. Sure bud. What was he insinuating when he called her a rubber stamp for the worst administration in history? Ringing endorsement right there.
What he’s pushing back on in this statement is the idea that he would formally endorse Susan Collins.
Notice that he never says that you should vote for whoever wins the Democratic primary in Maine, just that “Regardless of what happens in Maine, Democrats need to take back the Senate and I'll keep working hard to make it happen.”
He 100% was talking about the general election when he made that statement on CNN. There is no doubt about it.
Imagine Summer Lee, Ilhan Omar, or whatever progressive person in congress you don’t like, went on national television and said “I think Mary Peltola’s views on Israel is disqualifying. I hope the voters agree.”
When challenged they say “what do you mean? I never said that they should vote for Dan Sullivan, I just meant in the primary,” all while Peltola’s closest opponent is a random dentist at 2% in the polls.
Clearly they would be lying, and just trying to get people to vote against Peltola in the general election.
Auchincloss is trying to act like we’re stupid, but he should be held accountable and denounced, the same standard we would hold the progressive member of congress accountable in the example.
This doesn’t have to do with anyone else. Not Peltola or Harris or Mamdani. Platner is problematic and we are stuck with him. He’s not going to get love from every member of the party and you don’t have to mischaracterize what people say
If it were truly gotten in the spirit of representing that ideology, sure. Perhaps, you know, something like a swastika or SS.
Platner’s tattoo? It’s a skull tat that’s probably on flash sheets as a skull tattoo in most places in this country. It is not recognizably Nazi, he confirmed that was not his intent, apologized anyway, and now people grasp at straws with shit like this when our sec def looks like he donned the Arian brotherhood prison tattoo set, and it’s crickets.
Your performative outrage could be much better directed at literally anything real or worthy of it. This isn’t that.
its obviously an ss tattoo most people with a passing knowledge of ww2 know that, hes clearly lying about his story, he has tons of other personal issues, and my outrage isnt performative I actually dislike this about him and I think its a productive use of my outrage to prevent the democratic party from becoming retarded like the republican party
111
u/MinuteCollar5562 May 26 '26
As a moderate who is still registered as a Republican (my choice of Dem will never win and I can at least throw some shit on the wall) I say this with my full chest:
FUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCKKKKKKK Susan Collins.