General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPLEASE READ THIS, I BEG OF YOU PEOPLE!!!
There are six right wing supreme court members who are trying to end democracy.
The entire elected republican party, who control every single branch of federal government now and a majority of state governments try to openly overthrow our Country in 2021.
The US President is getting away with whatever his drug adult drug-addicted
brain and billionaires are whispering to him at that time, including a nuclear annihilation of the planet, and his party refuses to get rid of him.
Yet, I am seeing many people screaming and yelling about a senate candidate (who has the best chance of winning against a person who would overthrow the government and force a fascist dictatorship on all of us) who was on our side Who would vote for all our judges because he sent inappropriate messages to some women last year.
Am I reading this correctly?
Would I be correct to say these are the exact same people who voted for jill stein and wine bitch screamed, moaned and bleeded about israel and stayed out of the last election? Are these the same people who voted for Ralph Nader because of whatever.
I thought this was a democratic website where we support democratic candidates, not tear them down.
I think that all of the negativity toward the main senate candidate should be taken down on this website. This isn't a right-wing website, and it makes us look not united. When you have this going on.
To me, it looks like there from, and they may be from the susan collins campaign or working on behalf of the republican party.
By the way, tearing down the guy who has the best chance of saving our democracy from what's going on. And incidentally, the president, it wasn't he accused of on more than a few occasions, doing more than sending inappropriate text messages to women?
Sogo
(7,327 posts)nt.
PuraVidaDreamin
(4,706 posts)Nearly every Repugnant scandal is forgotten by the masses
after a few days. No time to act mightier than thou.
Welcome BJBB!
Baitball Blogger
(52,764 posts)turn out to be useful idiots for the Republican party.
I wish we had a reckoning with them BEFORE the last election.
nini
(16,833 posts)I have serious doubts about his motives and don't trust him. However, I don't live in Maine so it's on them to fix things.
We need to do better getting anyone who runs for office fully vetted to avoid this kind of garbage. I believe there's plenty of infiltration by dinos to disrupt things. And my personal opinion were getting played again. We must do better.
2naSalit
(103,963 posts)No, you are not.
And I think you miss the point about a man's attitudes about women when you complain that his inappropriate behavior and attitudes toward women is a nothingburger. Women have had to take the back seat whenever there are 'more pressing issues' and have waited for centuries to be recognized as full members of the human race.
Enough is enough, right here, right now.
Personally, I think the choice that is presented here is that you'd rather have a young guy with questionable moral standards replace an older woman with questionable moral standards. I'd rather go with the older woman who has acceptable moral standards and a proven track record but you all have written her off because she's not young.
Somehow I get the feeling there is a strong sense that inequality is okay as long as it is allowed by a young guy who shouts louder than everyone else. I see a lot of cutting the guy a lot of slack because those women are just not reliable when they get older and have no wiggle room at all. And so what if the guy insults women when he thinks nobody is looking?
When are women going to have their rights restored? I don't hear tat topic come up in the conversation and I find that a big problem when considering someone for a long term position that carries a lot of weight when it comes to giving and taking of individual rights... it's not just about the benjamins when it comes to actual rights of bodily autonomy and social mobility - little things like that where the wimmins are just expected to roll over one more time because some guy who has a problem with women also has a good script writer looks like the 'safe bet'. Same as it ever was.
This isn't about purity, it's about moral character and whether the guy can get behind the issues that women need him to care about... he's not making the best impression when it comes to the health and well being of at least half the population. Having a sexist attitude toward half of the population is a problem, a BIG problem.
Cirsium
(4,147 posts)Is this a parody?
it is a noobie w a wild hair about platner.
2naSalit
(103,963 posts)'Shut up you women and people who are against sexism and sexual abuse against women, how dare you reject the sexting and nazi tattoos because we don't want to see that there are three other candidates running for this office too and none of them are swaggering sextists with lots of tattoos. Because women belong in the back seat when we want to elect the guy we can't even vote for.
Hard to argue when the same old same old is the comfortable place for too many when it comes to women's' rights and well being.
Cirsium
(4,147 posts)We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all (white) men (with property) are created equal, that they are endowed by (themselves) with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their powers from the consent of the (wealthy white men with power).
2naSalit
(103,963 posts)And no progress has ever been made after those words were written.
orangecrush
(31,326 posts)
mcar
(46,421 posts)Seems to me the Stein voters and "Killer Kamala" types are the ones now saying we can't have purity tests re Platner. Yet many of them have their own purity tests for other Democratic candidates and electeds.
For example, to some on the far left, Hakeem Jeffries needs to be replaced because he once posted a tweet that mentioned god. Other candidates and electeds are to be primaried because their campaigns have benefitted from PAC $$ - but only one PAC.
Emile
(43,487 posts)It needs to stop today!
Kali
(56,929 posts)oh, you are gone already