Yep - been saying this for a while now.
And I’m not here to brush his issues under the rug, either. But the responses I’ve seen from him, to me, look an awful lot like a guy who owns his shit. He’s been honest and straightforward about his (to be fair, reasonably serious) issues from the past, but also seems to have genuinely improved and done a ton of work on himself. As someone who has also done a ton of work on themself, I respect the effort, honesty, and trajectory - not to mention, that’s a damn sight more real of a track record of genuine improvement than just about any politician, who’s far more likely to bullshit you to get your vote and then just do what AIPAC or the DNC establishment says.
I’d rather have an honest, flawed politician who’s genuinely trying to be a better person and actually largely aligns with the concerns of their constituents than a “perfect” electable candidate who jacks off to the status quo.
Well put, I’m also a fellow self worker, and I don’t get my “bullshitter alarm bells” set off when he speaks. The campaign to discredit him, however, feels exactly like all the other political smear campaigns we’ve seen funded by the ultra wealthy and the establishment.
The main thing that disappoints me is how he handled the totenkopf thing. He claims not to know it was a nazi tattoo. I don’t think he is, or ever was a nazi, but he absolutely has known what the tattoo was since the day he got it.
The truth is probably just that he was a dumb kid who just saw it as a symbol of an “elite” military unit and just general rebelliousness, like the punk musicians who adopted nazi imagery. 20 years ago, nazis didn’t seem like a real threat; they seemed like history (to a lot of people). Like even though genghis khan committed a lot of atrocities, I wouldn’t think someone with a genghis tattoo is some kind of apologist.
He should have taken the opportunity to actually explain himself, cause I think it’s important to show that just because you were a dumbass doesn’t mean you need to keep being one. Instead, I’m sure he listened to campaign strategists yelling him to pretend he didn’t know what it was.
There are two avenues of attack: against his supported policies, and against his person.
I haven’t seen any effective discussion, let alone attacks, against his policies. Everything is against his person.
The best his policies can be assailed is by casting doubt on him as a person. Since he isn’t actively campaigning on supporting genocide, the lobby against him needs to draw attention away from his expressed policies.
Because ultimately his election would be a massive blow to the status quo.
If I could make this a distinguished comment, I would.
It worked on Al Franken, it worked on Katie Porter, so rightists and liberals will use continue to use this playbook because it works.
It is the same “weaponize religious purity” playbook that has been used by oligarchs for thousands of years.
Did anyone think they weren’t?
NPR had an insightful long form interview with him last week. He seems to be a challenging guy to figure out. I don’t envy Mainers making this decision.
The Attacks on Graham Platner Are Politically Motivated
Wait, is he not runnig for Senate for a Politically Motivated reason
Graham Platner’s critics are operating with a politically motivated double standard.
No genocide?
That poor racist baby murdering POS
Oh hey, you’re mentioned in the article
Removed by mod
