OK, I feel whoever wrote his primary victory speech (and I'm not saying he didn't do it himself, or at least contribute a lot) has been reading me, and my plea that he should center his campaign not around his imaginary working class identity but his redemption story—not that he shouldn't talk about the working class (as he did, eloquently), but that he should center his self-presentation on Platner as a kind of abuse survivor, getting past his PTSD thanks to the love of a good woman and the advice of a few good therapists. I'm sorry if that sounds sarcastic, it's not how I mean it. He really has been through some things, and he's emerging out the other end of those. He even quoted "Amazing grace", as I advised.
I think the main reasons more women than men in Maine support Platner is 1) more men vote GOP, and 2) more women are pissed with Collins because of Roe v. Wade being reversed.
OK, and one politically incorrect reason-we love his gravelly voice.
My definition of "mercenary" is a hired gun in a foreign place. If that is somehow eccentric, that would be news to me. This is why I am not judging him for merely working in a mercenary company in the field as a hired gun for a diplomat. Especially, if allegations like the Afghan civilian killing thing don't have enough evidence. Not all mercenaries are like Erik and Prigozhin. Many guard oil fields and tankers in hot places, or sometimes diplomatic personnel. He is not a Nazi, nor a Fascist, and can also be reasonably described as a one-time mercenary. "One-time mercenary" is as far as I am willing to soften it without feeling as if I am lying.
"Former mercenary" does not mean he killed anyone or did anything else. Not all mercs are like Erik or Prigozhin. Just because he worked in a mercenary company and may have been one himself does not mean that he actually did anything wrong. That allegation about Afghan civilians does not have enough evidence as far as I have seen. My definition of mercenary is a hired gun in a foreign place, if that is too eccentric, that would be news to me.
Yeah, but the demand from people condemning Platner is you don't have the luxury of not deciding whether you believe his story. They believe the story the media has laid out, and you must as well. I know you don't roll like that but that's the answer I get engaging in comments.
Its frustrating because I get the moral outrage. Platner's just one more privileged white guy getting away with it, when we're being ruled by a cult of them who make Platner look like Mr. Rogers. He's lumped in with them because he's obviously trying to trick us, or more likely he has been tainted by sin from which no redemption will be allowed. Liberals are not in a forgiving mood.
It bothers other people a lot. I have tried to dig down into why in comment arguments at LGM but its a brick wall. He's a Nazi, and we're done here. I call it a button being pushed because I can't get an explanation, but if's likely my lack of skill in cross-examination. I keep asking questions I don't know the answers to, all I get is pure emotion.
Which is weird to me. Why the focus and anger when this guy comes up? There's a lot of awful politicians, not even Rahm Emmanuel gets this treatment.
*hes a Nazi
*hes a thug mercenary who loves to kill
*hes an entitled white man playacting at being working class
*hes abusive to women and virtually cheating on his wife
Its the worst possible interpretation of scanty facts. Why? Is it some sense of betrayal? Offering himself as a hero only to be revealed as a Nazi thug misogynyst phony?
That is funny, the feeling I have got is that people are trying to skate over this way too quickly. Please understand, I am someone who is somewhat receptive to him and I think at least some of his defenders are trying way to hard. Enough.
Not sure what "too quickly" means. Not enough acknowledgement Platner's failings are a serious problem? Defenders offering weak excuses? Its perspective I guess. What I see is attackers going all-in. Defenders boil down to
* nobody's perfect, and he's sort-of apologized
* he's the only Democrat out there who can/might beat Collins
I don't think he is a Nazi or a fascist, but I do doubt he is telling the truth about the tattoo. Maybe not a deal breaker for me, but on some level... c'mon.
I am more comfortable with his mercenary stuff than probably 99.99% in the rough blue coalition. Be careful with what may emerge from his time from there, though. We may not have been told everything.
I have not read the NYTwit investigation and shitstorm after because I don't trust them. But I don't trust Platner, either.
I think he is worth supporting against Collins, but it is hard to believe he has been fully upfront.
He wasn't a mercenary at all. As I wrote earlier: It wasn’t for Blackwater’s mercenaries but the State Department contracts of the successor company, Constellis, not owned by Erik Prince, and his job was providing security for the US ambasssador in Kabul, who didn’t need security since, as Platner later explained, “We were barely leaving the Green Zone… All I did was lift weights and play video games. I got huge and I played a lot of Far Cry.”
Untrustworthy is where I ended up, but I'm not sure where trustworthy is, and how important it is. Most people agree Gavin Newsom, Governor of California and likely Presidential candidate in 28, is untrustworthy. But he's done a better job of running California overall than almost anyone could. I'll oppose him in the primary but happily vote for him if he is the guy. That's where I am with Platner. His challenge is going to be building a staff and learning on the fly how to be a Senator. He's never been elected so its all gonna be new. I'd oppose him more for that than a tattoo, knowing or not.
LGM! They still exist? Yeah, "brick wall" sounds right. Years ago it was my experience that people there, whom I agreed with 95%, would fly into unhinged personal attacks over my outstanding 5%. I never had an interaction there that did not feel like a waste of time.
OK, I feel whoever wrote his primary victory speech (and I'm not saying he didn't do it himself, or at least contribute a lot) has been reading me, and my plea that he should center his campaign not around his imaginary working class identity but his redemption story—not that he shouldn't talk about the working class (as he did, eloquently), but that he should center his self-presentation on Platner as a kind of abuse survivor, getting past his PTSD thanks to the love of a good woman and the advice of a few good therapists. I'm sorry if that sounds sarcastic, it's not how I mean it. He really has been through some things, and he's emerging out the other end of those. He even quoted "Amazing grace", as I advised.
I think the main reasons more women than men in Maine support Platner is 1) more men vote GOP, and 2) more women are pissed with Collins because of Roe v. Wade being reversed.
OK, and one politically incorrect reason-we love his gravelly voice.
My definition of "mercenary" is a hired gun in a foreign place. If that is somehow eccentric, that would be news to me. This is why I am not judging him for merely working in a mercenary company in the field as a hired gun for a diplomat. Especially, if allegations like the Afghan civilian killing thing don't have enough evidence. Not all mercenaries are like Erik and Prigozhin. Many guard oil fields and tankers in hot places, or sometimes diplomatic personnel. He is not a Nazi, nor a Fascist, and can also be reasonably described as a one-time mercenary. "One-time mercenary" is as far as I am willing to soften it without feeling as if I am lying.
"Former mercenary" does not mean he killed anyone or did anything else. Not all mercs are like Erik or Prigozhin. Just because he worked in a mercenary company and may have been one himself does not mean that he actually did anything wrong. That allegation about Afghan civilians does not have enough evidence as far as I have seen. My definition of mercenary is a hired gun in a foreign place, if that is too eccentric, that would be news to me.
Yeah, but the demand from people condemning Platner is you don't have the luxury of not deciding whether you believe his story. They believe the story the media has laid out, and you must as well. I know you don't roll like that but that's the answer I get engaging in comments.
Its frustrating because I get the moral outrage. Platner's just one more privileged white guy getting away with it, when we're being ruled by a cult of them who make Platner look like Mr. Rogers. He's lumped in with them because he's obviously trying to trick us, or more likely he has been tainted by sin from which no redemption will be allowed. Liberals are not in a forgiving mood.
I think I maybe am a little too comfortable with Platner. Not much of this has bothered me.
It bothers other people a lot. I have tried to dig down into why in comment arguments at LGM but its a brick wall. He's a Nazi, and we're done here. I call it a button being pushed because I can't get an explanation, but if's likely my lack of skill in cross-examination. I keep asking questions I don't know the answers to, all I get is pure emotion.
Which is weird to me. Why the focus and anger when this guy comes up? There's a lot of awful politicians, not even Rahm Emmanuel gets this treatment.
*hes a Nazi
*hes a thug mercenary who loves to kill
*hes an entitled white man playacting at being working class
*hes abusive to women and virtually cheating on his wife
Its the worst possible interpretation of scanty facts. Why? Is it some sense of betrayal? Offering himself as a hero only to be revealed as a Nazi thug misogynyst phony?
That is funny, the feeling I have got is that people are trying to skate over this way too quickly. Please understand, I am someone who is somewhat receptive to him and I think at least some of his defenders are trying way to hard. Enough.
Not sure what "too quickly" means. Not enough acknowledgement Platner's failings are a serious problem? Defenders offering weak excuses? Its perspective I guess. What I see is attackers going all-in. Defenders boil down to
* nobody's perfect, and he's sort-of apologized
* he's the only Democrat out there who can/might beat Collins
What am I missing?
I don't think he is a Nazi or a fascist, but I do doubt he is telling the truth about the tattoo. Maybe not a deal breaker for me, but on some level... c'mon.
I am more comfortable with his mercenary stuff than probably 99.99% in the rough blue coalition. Be careful with what may emerge from his time from there, though. We may not have been told everything.
I have not read the NYTwit investigation and shitstorm after because I don't trust them. But I don't trust Platner, either.
I think he is worth supporting against Collins, but it is hard to believe he has been fully upfront.
He wasn't a mercenary at all. As I wrote earlier: It wasn’t for Blackwater’s mercenaries but the State Department contracts of the successor company, Constellis, not owned by Erik Prince, and his job was providing security for the US ambasssador in Kabul, who didn’t need security since, as Platner later explained, “We were barely leaving the Green Zone… All I did was lift weights and play video games. I got huge and I played a lot of Far Cry.”
Untrustworthy is where I ended up, but I'm not sure where trustworthy is, and how important it is. Most people agree Gavin Newsom, Governor of California and likely Presidential candidate in 28, is untrustworthy. But he's done a better job of running California overall than almost anyone could. I'll oppose him in the primary but happily vote for him if he is the guy. That's where I am with Platner. His challenge is going to be building a staff and learning on the fly how to be a Senator. He's never been elected so its all gonna be new. I'd oppose him more for that than a tattoo, knowing or not.
LGM! They still exist? Yeah, "brick wall" sounds right. Years ago it was my experience that people there, whom I agreed with 95%, would fly into unhinged personal attacks over my outstanding 5%. I never had an interaction there that did not feel like a waste of time.
I am there for that 5%. Then again, I might be one of the most belligerent liberals out there, so my tolerances are very different.
Murc was right.