Because the GOP want to pull a Strom Thrummond and just use his near-corpse as a political puppet. There is a documentary about this exact phenomenon
It only seems like it will never end, one day it will end though.
Standard operating procedure for him then.
All of British history has been leading up to this moment. It will be the most apt victory or most ironic defeat.
I think the most poetic thing would be if the human trash got taken out by the guy dressed as a dustbin.
A lot of people are pointing out that previous allegations and a confirmed ratio of a Nazi symbol should have been big clues. Let me provide some clarification.
As far as the tattoo, the symbol in question is not a swastika or anything that stands out as Nazi-affiliated to someone not already in the know. Had I seen this image before looking it up while knowing about it ahead of time, I wouldn’t have had the first clue as to its historical connection, as I’d be willing to bet many people wouldn’t. Planter had states that he got the tattoo while serving in the military while he was in Croatia and didn’t know its significance, which is not only possible but plausible. If he had known at the time, people do in fact change their views and can be left stuck with tattoos of symbols that they no longer believe in. He claims he’s covered the original symbol with a tattoo of a Celtic rope, so that could have been the case as well. This alone was never enough to question his fitness, just to pay closer attention.
As to the allegations of misconduct, those claims originally surfaced on Reddit, and some of the people reporting on them were allegedly known to have affiliations with conservative movements, so it could easily be seen as an attempted smear campaign to weaken the voting resolve behind Platner to benefit the Republican control of Congress. Again, not enough on its own to disrupt the progress made to get his support from voters, but enough to maintain closer scrutiny on his actions and his past.
Finally, with a Republican-controlled Congress doing nothing to reign in our president or Supreme Court from taking actions that are affecting millions of people on a financial, medical, and constitutional level, the Democrats could not take the chance of letting an opportunity to regain control slip based on unverified accusations from questionable sources and an easily explainable tattoo.
This latest accusation is from a direct and verifiable source with no apparent lack of credibility, and that is why this one is considered enough for those who previously offered their support to immediately begin pulling it, especially when the previous controversies weigh on top of it, regardless of their credibility. At this point the controversy is took great to take the risk of detailing the whole thing and now calls for Platner to step aside are coming from higher sources. Many are saying that the precious controversies should have been the first clue, but again, easily interpreted as an attempted smear campaign by the opposition. This lates one is almost certainly not, and so now action is being taken swiftly.
It should be noted that this is a vastly different response to credible accusations than the response to such individuals as Donald Trump and Ken Paxton, both explicitly criminally indicted (and one convicted), who have been defended and kept in office by those now condemning the Democrats.
I know it’s rumoured that he may be brain dead, and that they want to avoid a by-election. But I don’t want to be spreading misinformation.
From what I understand, this rumour originates from influencers unfamiliar with the situation. And Steve Bannon
McConnell is just the latest example of why people in congress need term limits. Maybe age limits as well.
Rumoured? I think we have known that for decades now, this is just the body playing catch-up.
It was literally one of the most infamous symbols of the Nazi death camps and has been used as a the symbol of Nazi evil for decades at the point Platner was a child. It’s on record he referred to it by the same name the Nazis used. That you didn’t know that does not change that reality, nor that Platner either lied about knowing about it or lied about being interested in military history. He was clearly a lying liar who refused to accept accountability from the start.
In order to believe there was not cause for suspicion you would have to disregard the informed opinions of millions of people who pointed out that they knew exactly what it was at first glance.
Likewise, to not believe the allegations about him regarding his conduct both historically and the cheating on his wife you would have to willfully claim that 1. millions of women are lying liars who lie for the sake of lying; and 2. it’s okay to abuse republican women but not a red flag to be dating supposedly one of the most heinous of them.
The Red Flag That Led to Graham Platner’s Implosion Was Hiding in Plain Sight
Many of them are also glossing over that Platner is doing the “they won’t let me” associated with anti-semites who are dog-whistling, still not accepting accountability or showing any remorse while mysteriously insisting any other candidate have “openness and transperancy”. Or that he seems to be deliberately stalling on filing the paperwork to step down.
He and the people who supported him and continue to minimize what a terrible person and terrible candidate he was are doing the reactionary right massive boons. He took up air time and funding from other, more sincere progressive candidates and now he has sowed massive distrust of all progressive candidates.
He transparently did not actually care about any aspect of progressive politics, he was simply doing a Fetterman and doubtlessly intended to similarly just prioritize himself and his own ideas while telling his constituents their alternative was a Republican. Likewise his biggest supporters aren’t people who really want progressive politics, they just want particular things to change but otherwise uphold the status quo (that benefits them).
The only value he possibly has is as a terrible warning, to not minimize the blatant red flags and not do the “well it’s him or a Republican” approach when 1. there was never any evidence he was likely to take the extremely safe Republican seat and 2. there were, of course, other candidates - just you didn’t get to hear about them because people who didn’t want to have politics change too much decided to only talk about this 1 guy.
Well, for the symbol, I had never seen nor heard of it prior to this, and I’m operating under the assumption that unless someone chose to study the third Reich more closely that exposure to pop culture and general schooling, it would not automatically be something known by the average person. Millions of people might have pointed out that it was one, but that doesn’t mean he knew it was one when he got it. I’m not a person who has or wants a tattoo, but if I were, saw that symbol, decided I wanted it, and nobody told me it was a Nazi symbol, I could end up with it just that easily as well. Not saying that’s what happened, but it is plausible that it could have been.
As to the allegations, while I haven’t looked at each one, I highly doubt millions of women were making allegations against him, and I don’t think they’d be lying if they were. Generally, the overwhelming majority of accusations of such misconduct are true, with little incentive for lying about it in the first place. In this case, the timing and source of the allegations, especially in a political climate where claims of some kind of crime or unethical behavior as an election nears has become the playbook, with the 2016 election being a prime example, that warrants a closer look at the candidate, sure, but not necessarily grounds for someone stepping out of a race altogether. They probably should just for the optics, but it doesn’t have to immediately kill a campaign.
Once more substantial claims from credible sources arise however, as in this case, then political considerations need to be set aside, and that’s what’s happening now. Were those earlier signs red flags? Sure, but they weren’t acted on earlier because the totality wasn’t enough yet to warrant putting the brakes on the whole thing automatically. It has reached that point now, and that’s why there’s now a change.
Not are you making absurd assumptions, you are stating them as facts.
It could more clearly be a Nazi tattoo to a man of his generation if it was literally the swastika with “Heil Hilter! The Reich Will Rise Again!” underneath.
Then you don’t comment on them.
Which is the entire issue here - you and countless others didn’t actually know anything but were extremely comfortable confidently making proclamations of facts and deciding what was and wasn’t reasonable, despite not having the first clue what was actually happening.
That is, routinely, the point raised by millions of women. That when men are openly misogynistic on platforms like Reddit, that when there are women women warning other women not to trust/date him and that when he lies about things and claims these are just targeted opposition it means he’s untrustworthy.
They said as much, and were ridiculed and harassed by people who went “it shouldn’t kill his campaign.” You continue to double down on this.
You needed to have a closer look at the ex-mercenary candidate who lied about his Nazi tattoo and had a reputation for being shit to women before he became a political candidate? You didn’t even look at any of it before posting your claims that you knew all the facts. The problem is not only did you not want to take a closer look, you still don’t.
Giant flashing red ones, with Nazi death camp symbols on them.
Alternatively because lots of people didn’t want a genuinely progressive candidate, they wanted an bro-ey alpha male type who would fix the economy while allowing them to continue being shitty to women, blaming all their problems on jews, etc. To support him after the tattoo reveal you expressly had to be the kind of person who happily told women, jews, and everyone else who Nazis target that they are stupid and you won’t listen to them.
Further showcased here by the fact you have no concerns about:
Continuing to pretend this was anything other than a complete and utter failure by the Democrats and numerous commentators at every single level only helps Republicans as they can now credibly claim “Democrats don’t care if it’s a rapist Nazi, as long as he’s their rapist Nazi and he only rapes Republicans.”
This is what comes of deciding you just like the cut of a guy’s jib, and thus will mitigate all the red flags and say “we need to look closer” while covering your eyes and forgetting it’s candidates responsibility to showcase why they can be trusted with the power they are actively requesting.
Graham Platner is and always was a pathetic self-serving shell of a man who abuses and exploits others, and it was obvious early on to those paying attention.
This is why I don’t discuss things here
I’m not going to comment further on that as I see your point and don’t want to sound like I’m actually defending the guy on the allegations, and in hindsight my previous posts already sound like I’m doing that.
But I do want to say, regarding the symbol, I am not stating it as fact that others wouldn’t know. I did say that I’m going under an assumption, and that’s not a claim of being factual. Those images provided aren’t helpful examples to the contrary, because I’ve seen the movies those images are taken from, and not only do I not remember the symbol from them, I didn’t even notice what those symbols where until now that you posted those. If I saw that same symbol in a selection of tattoos prior to this whole ordeal, I’d still have never known that this was its origin if someone didn’t tell me just before getting it or unless it had a description beside it, because I’m not looking at the insignia on the hats in those scenes when I’m watching the film, and wouldn’t be able to differentiate it as being anything other than one of many variations of skull and bones images. Again, I’m assuming the average casual viewer who isn’t already well versed in Nazi imagery outside of the swastika, and never had a clear, blown up image of that symbol pointed out to them that it’s a Nazi symbol, wouldn’t know that either. So someone claiming that they hadn’t known it was a Nazi symbol prior to getting it is a plausible scenario, and I say that from personal experience (of not having known, not of having gotten one).
Saying “I didn’t know it was a Nazi symbol” is not conclusive evidence of anything. Most people understand that knowledge is not shared collectively. It’s very normal and okay not to know things, it’s very not normal and not okay to decide because you don’t know a thing that means someone who definitely should have wouldn’t have known, and that everyone pointing out all the reasons why he should know are just wrong.
In order for Platner’s claim that it made sense and he didn’t get it as a Nazi tattoo (as reported at the time):
So no, his story does not make sense - nor is it plausible as you claimed. No part of the story made sense if you actually scrutinize it. While I am perfectly willing to believe you are ignorant of all this, that is why you should not be speaking on it - let alone claiming it’s plausible and makes sense actually-because doing so means you are actively defending both the Nazi-tattoo-wearing mercenary rapist, but also everyone who looked at the Nazi-tattoo-wearing mercenary rapist and went “That’s our guy!!! Ignore what people are saying about him, bitches be lying, you can’t trust jews or women!”
It is worth pointing out the marines have their own badass deaths-head, and a problem with their guys thinking Nazis symbols are for the lolz. Also that the original Nazis themselves got into power by a variety of techniques including leaning into military history and promising socialist ideas (right up until The Night of the Long Knives (check out Himler’s hat in the photo)).
This is not a case of “well we finally got some good evidence” this is a case of someone that democratic pundits didn’t feel comfortable launching an attack campaign coming forward with a story that was too persuasive for them to dismiss. Well some of them. One of the Democratic guys allegedly just really, really wanted Platner in because he wanted him to prevent a woman (specifically AOC, but his objection is a woman) from being the Dem Presidential candidate.
Meanwhile, FOX News is having a great time pointing out the staggering incompetence of the Democrats (collectively) vetting a former mercenary with no political experience for an important Senate seat. Their audience are eating it all up because it was obvious from word go that Platner was a terrible person - and it’s going to get worse given the info coming out about the guy in charge of the vetting.
So, perhaps consider not spreading disinformation that everything about Platner’s campaign was actually okay and there was no genuine basis for concern - and that it’s plausible a guy who brags about being a World War II buff didn’t know that symbol was a Nazi one, particularly when his former campaign manager claims otherwise.
Watch the Rebecca Watson video as many times as you need to in order to let it sink in why it matters not to continue perpetuating the lie that his tattoo was plausibly just innocent.
I was not saying that his campaign was ok and that the claims against him had no basis, but that it wasn’t enough on its own at the time to simply put the breaks on his campaign, in the eyes of those trying to get him elected, based on the information I’d seen.
That being said, several of those points you made there about it were not ones that showed up in any of the discussions or articles I’d seen on the subject, and so I see how my earlier comments look in light of that when, yeah, that should have been enough to the people running his campaign to question moving forward. And considering some who I’ve called out in the past for their posts, that’s making me a huge hypocrite. So I’ll admit my whole basis was built on too little info to be speaking about it in the first place and end it here.
No, that’s too kind. He’s a malicious racist who has helped undermine American democracy.
Count Binface has been getting a lot of appearances on British media lately. Perhaps the funniest however is the fact that The Telegraph has ran a couple of hit pieces on him, how they don’t find him funny, and are accusing him of being a pawn of “THE ESTABLISHMENT”. Which is hilarious when you consider Farage has been a dominating force in British politics for over a decade, but sure, he’s the real “outsider”.
Been a lot of good memes made about this, I’ll need to post on the Funny Pictures thread later. But this interview with Andrew Marr I think shows off his appeal really well.
Might be wishful thinking. I also like to think some politicians in Germany, most prominently in the AfD, are outsiders in the grand scheme of things, given how much other parties try to isolate them. But it can be dangerous to not watch for the signs.
I hate to put a dampener on your optimism but I would like to point out the Nazi Party were a minority party for most of its pre-chacellorship and even when they elected it was as a minority party I believe.
The tricky thing about reactionaries isn’t that they are so few compared to sane people but that they have a sort of moral sociopathy that means they play by their own rules even when playing along with others that they eventually abandon when they start forcing their rules onto you because they are “winning” so to speak.
Yeah well you don’t have to remind a German of that, for reasons we learn these things by a great detail. 
A difference from the NSDAP is that every party today would rather drink poison than using the AfD to form a majority.
