5 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

This tranny is one of like a dozen people running and has zero chance.

Just because some imbecile runs doesn't mean they represent the party.

Voters decide who represents the party, not candidates.

We are having this truncated process because the genius voters previously picked a rapist with a NSDAP tattoo.

So let’s not be too excited about the wisdom of voters.

9 hours ago, Bill said:

Honestly at this point there needs to be a three party system. The morons and grifters can have the GOP and the DNC, and some new centrist party can come in and sweep the normie vote.

100% - c'mon join the "Both Siders"

10 hours ago, vikas83 said:

We are having this truncated process because the genius voters previously picked a rapist with a NSDAP tattoo.

So let’s not be too excited about the wisdom of voters.

Didn't the rape allegations come out after the primary? I seriously doubt primary voters in Maine would've still voted for him if they knew about that beforehand. The tattoo stuff is still bad, but plausibly deniable, whereas rape allegations are much harder to hand wave away.

1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Didn't the rape allegations come out after the primary? I seriously doubt primary voters in Maine would've still voted for him if they knew about that beforehand. The tattoo stuff is still bad, but plausibly deniable, whereas rape allegations are much harder to hand wave away.

Nothing about that tattoo was plausibly deniable.

1 hour ago, Bill said:

Nothing about that tattoo was plausibly deniable.

Whoever vetted that guy should be dismissed

12 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Didn't the rape allegations come out after the primary? I seriously doubt primary voters in Maine would've still voted for him if they knew about that beforehand. The tattoo stuff is still bad, but plausibly deniable, whereas rape allegations are much harder to hand wave away.

A bunch of stories about him came out about him acting inappropriately or aggressively with women. FWIW, the woman whose rape accusation came out in July said the NY Times punted on investigating her claims. But add that to the NSDAP tattoo, sexting with women after being married, having an account on Kik…yeah, let’s not deify the voters here. We get the elected officials we deserve - and most voters are morons.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/04/us/politics/platner-maine-senate-girlfriends-relationships.html

37 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

A bunch of stories about him came out about him acting inappropriately or aggressively with women. FWIW, the woman whose rape accusation came out in July said the NY Times punted on investigating her claims. But add that to the NSDAP tattoo, sexting with women after being married, having an account on Kik…yeah, let’s not deify the voters here. We get the elected officials we deserve - and most voters are morons.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/04/us/politics/platner-maine-senate-girlfriends-relationships.html

Sure, but that's still not equivalent to them nominating a rapist.

on paper, early on, Platner seemed like a good candidate for Maine.

for a layman, the tattoo doesn't invoke thoughts of not-zees. I get that if you're in the military that you should know better, but I could also see a crayon eater stumbling into a tattoo parlor and thinking "that looks badass". so I disagree that for a typical voter there isn't plausible deniability there.

Platner presented himself all along as someone who had a checkered past and did things he wasn't proud of, and who was trying to come off as someone who genuinely evolved beyond them. and perhaps he is.

his only real rival for the senate seat, Mills, suspended her campaign months before the June primary. by then he was pretty much unopposed.

to be sure Dems shot themselves in the foot here with it. but aside from Mills, who didn't have the funds to continue her campaign (and is 78 freaking years old), there wasn't another challenger.

none of the "new" challengers seem particularly good either.

amazing that in a state that's a bit left of center, albeit also a bit kooky, can't come up with another Democratic candidate for a vulnerable senate seat.

This really should be a layup for the dems in November lol

Dems will somehow screw it up though

9 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I can't think of anything dumber for a Dem to say in 2026. Might as well say "please don't vote for me".

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

I can't think of anything dumber for a Dem to say in 2026. Might as well say "please don't vote for me".

Which tells us just how much freakin money these guys are getting from AIPAC.

2 minutes ago, Lloyd said:

Which tells us just how much freakin money these guys are getting from AIPAC.

True, but it doesn't even serve AIPAC well. Paying a candidate ungodly sums of money to tank their own candidacy and never take office doesn't get AIPAC a damn thing.

16 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Sure, but that's still not equivalent to them nominating a rapist.

I mean, the did nominate a rapist. Your arguing they didn't know he was a rapist at the time, but given all the info already out there on him, being a rapist was on the board.

But yeah - they nominated a rapist. The GOP did in 2016, even if the E Jean Carroll stuff came out later.

I mean, I am in favor of US support for Israel, and even I think that statement is nuts. No relationship should go "unquestioned."

Like most Americans, I support Israel but wish they had a different leader.

11 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

for a layman, the tattoo doesn't invoke thoughts of not-zees. I get that if you're in the military that you should know better, but I could also see a crayon eater stumbling into a tattoo parlor and thinking "that looks badass". so I disagree that for a typical voter there isn't plausible deniability there.

Worst case scenario is obvious.

Even your best case scenario is a drunken Marine walked into a tattoo parlor, in Croatia, of all places, and got a tattoo of not only bad guys, but the worst guys of the bad guys, and somehow we can all just go "Eh, Maine's weird, man." Yeah, I'm not buying any of that. If you're a drunk American and you want a skull tattoo, you get a Jolly Roger or some ish, not that. He knew what he was was doing.

Before the primary there it came out that he knew exactly what it was, anyway, so the best case scenario is a moot point.

4 hours ago, vikas83 said:

I mean, the did nominate a rapist. Your arguing they didn't know he was a rapist at the time, but given all the info already out there on him, being a rapist was on the board.

But yeah - they nominated a rapist. The GOP did in 2016, even if the E Jean Carroll stuff came out later.

You were clearly implying that they should've known he was a rapist before filling in their ballots, which is just silly based on what was known at the time. Unless I'm mistaken on the timeline of events here, the allegations of rape only came out after he won the nomination. Sexting is one thing, rape is another entirely.

16 hours ago, vikas83 said:

I mean, I am in favor of US support for Israel, and even I think that statement is nuts. No relationship should go "unquestioned."

Like most Americans, I support Israel but wish they had a different leader.

I am sympathetic to most of their people. They are a lot like us. They foolishly elected a tyrant that is turning them into a fascist state, and now there isn't much they can do about it. For that reason I don't think we should be giving them military aid of any kind until that changes.

13 hours ago, Bill said:

Worst case scenario is obvious.

Even your best case scenario is a drunken Marine walked into a tattoo parlor, in Croatia, of all places, and got a tattoo of not only bad guys, but the worst guys of the bad guys, and somehow we can all just go "Eh, Maine's weird, man." Yeah, I'm not buying any of that. If you're a drunk American and you want a skull tattoo, you get a Jolly Roger or some ish, not that. He knew what he was was doing.

Before the primary there it came out that he knew exactly what it was, anyway, so the best case scenario is a moot point.

Was it this?

or was it this?

Needs more hat

On 7/21/2026 at 10:00 AM, Gannan said:

Was it this?

or was it this?

The first photo isn't showing up for me.

Based on the second photo, I'm just going to assume that the other one was also you cherry picking uncommon pirate symbology that looked close-ish to a Totenkopf, instead of the super common jolly roger flag or maybe the lesser known but still common queen anne flag, both of which were in heavy usage on morale patches in the military during GWOT, and not any other pirate symbol that would look similar to a Totenkopf.

I mean, maybe not, because making such an argument would be completely absurd since a: the tattoo is very obviously a Totenkopf, and b: Platner openly admitted it was a Totenkopf to people before he ran for Senate.

I can't for the life of me how anyone needs to save face that badly over getting bamboozled, that they resort to an argument that is essentially, "How could any of us have known that this NSDAP was a rapist?"

45 minutes ago, Bill said:

The first photo isn't showing up for me.

Based on the second photo, I'm just going to assume that the other one was also you cherry picking uncommon pirate symbology that looked close-ish to a Totenkopf, instead of the super common jolly roger flag or maybe the lesser known but still common queen anne flag, both of which were in heavy usage on morale patches in the military during GWOT, and not any other pirate symbol that would look similar to a Totenkopf.

I mean, maybe not, because making such an argument would be completely absurd since a: the tattoo is very obviously a Totenkopf, and b: Platner openly admitted it was a Totenkopf to people before he ran for Senate.

I can't for the life of me how anyone needs to save face that badly over getting bamboozled, that they resort to an argument that is essentially, "How could any of us have known that this NSDAP was a rapist?"

The first photo is Duff McKagens bass with a red skull on it. I was legitimately asking. I can’t get a clear photo on it from google. The only one of the uncovered tattoo I can find is dark and unclear and could look like either

Is there an actual photo of Platner's tattoo? Not the cover-up, the actual tattoo