Graham Platner, Democrat Candidate & Rising Star

[Hardcore troubadour]

The democrats put a senate seat in the hands of a 27 year old rich kid with zero life experience and a clown with a Nazi tattoo. And they want to run the country. 

[Voltaire]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The democrats put a senate seat in the hands of a 27 year old rich kid with zero life experience and a clown with a Nazi tattoo. And they want to run the country. 

You must be mistaken. A Congressman can be 25, but the minimum age for senate is 30.

[squistion]

4 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

You must be mistaken. A Congressman can be 25, but the minimum age for senate is 30.

As usual Hardcore Troubadour has no clue what he is talking about.

[Hardcore troubadour]

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

As usual Hardcore Troubadour has no clue what he is talking about.

It’s two different people.  Shows how much you know about what’s going on. You never even heard of Morris Katz?  Please shut up.  Thanks. 

[HellToupee]

He took the $$$$, just like Bernie did . It’s how the Democrat party operates. He abandoned his comrades for money. 

[HellToupee]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s two different people.  Shows how much you know about what’s going on. You never even heard of Morris Katz?  Please shut up.  Thanks. 

You would think squissy would know Katz because of his Mamdani connection. I guess squissy just waves his pompoms at any D without any knowledge 

[Hardcore troubadour]

Just now, HellToupee said:

You would think squissy would know Katz because of his Mamdani connection. I guess squissy just waves his pompoms at any D without any knowledge 

Yeah. He’s pretty low IQ, even for a liberal. 

[Strike]

For all you Libs who think there wasn't anything to see until the last day or two, here is a decent enough synopsis of all the stuff you overlooked for the last 8-10 months:

https://www.axios.com/2026/07/08/trump-effect-platner-maine-democrats

[HellToupee]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yeah. He’s pretty low IQ, even for a liberal. 

His 1st concern is to see if they play the skin flute or gnaw on the carpet 

[TimHauck]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

Well, umm, it seems that the NYT, that bastion of journalistic integrity, did a hack reporting job on her story to protect Platner.

 

This is where @Caine Mutinysays that the NYT must have just made a bunch of honest mistakes, because they would never intentionally do something like this.   

This is an odd claim IMO.   The NY Times publishes a story titled “Several Women Who Dated Graham Platner Recall Unsettling Behavior,” but somehow this is being construed as the NYT protecting Platner?

I wouldn’t say that Democrat leaders didn’t take Fifield’s claims seriously, it was moreso that she didn’t really make a serious allegation against him, as the most serious thing she accused him of was grabbing her arm.

I don’t disbelieve Fifield’s claims, but they are kinda all over the place.   For example, in this tweet, she claims the NYT didn’t try to call the other people.  Does she know that or maybe they just didn’t answer?

She also has now made other comments about how she thought she wasn’t going to be the centerpiece of the story, but in this tweet brings up other things not mentioned in the story (less serious than what was in the story) that she appears to imply she is surprised they didn’t include.  So which is it, is she upset she was the centerpiece or is she upset they didn’t include more of her claims?  

Speaking of her surprise at being the centerpiece of the story, she’s made comments that she thought Racicot’s allegations would be more prominent.  But as the story noted, Racicot acknowledged she did not elaborate about what happened to the NYT, so why would Fifield expect Racicot’s allegations to be more prominent when Fifield is acknowledging that she was “overwhelming” them with her own claims?

Finally, she apparently went to the NYT with the initial claims on her own, but is only now adding additional claims about the condom removal.  Why didn’t she include those claims initially?

[thegeneral]

Next man up (or broad). They have just under 3 weeks.  Then get after Collins.

This Troy Jackson dude seems to have the early jump but the “expert” from Maine I just heard speak said nearly 10 people could jump in.

[seafoam1]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Next man up (or broad). They have just under 3 weeks.  Then get after Collins.

This Troy Jackson dude seems to have the early jump but the “expert” from Maine I just heard speak said nearly 10 people could jump in.

Just like kameltoe jumped in for creepy joe. 

[TimHauck]

17 minutes ago, Strike said:

For all you Libs who think there wasn't anything to see until the last day or two, here is a decent enough synopsis of all the stuff you overlooked for the last 8-10 months:

https://www.axios.com/2026/07/08/trump-effect-platner-maine-democrats

The first time we heard a specific allegation of non-consensual behavior was in the days prior to the Politico story breaking."

 

thanks for confirming there is no evidence that people who actually wanted Platner to win had been sitting on this info.  

[HellToupee]

12 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Next man up (or broad). They have just under 3 weeks.  Then get after Collins.

This Troy Jackson dude seems to have the early jump but the “expert” from Maine I just heard speak said nearly 10 people could jump in.

The founder of the Maine Beer company is jumping in. Big fan of Dinner

[seafoam1]

37 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

The first time we heard a specific allegation of non-consensual behavior was in the days prior to the Politico story breaking."

 

thanks for confirming there is no evidence that people who actually wanted Platner to win had been sitting on this info.  

You try hard. Yet always seem to fail. 

Nothing new for a liberal. 

[jerryskids]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

This is an odd claim IMO.   The NY Times publishes a story titled “Several Women Who Dated Graham Platner Recall Unsettling Behavior,” but somehow this is being construed as the NYT protecting Platner?

I wouldn’t say that Democrat leaders didn’t take Fifield’s claims seriously, it was moreso that she didn’t really make a serious allegation against him, as the most serious thing she accused him of was grabbing her arm.

I don’t disbelieve Fifield’s claims, but they are kinda all over the place.   For example, in this tweet, she claims the NYT didn’t try to call the other people.  Does she know that or maybe they just didn’t answer?

She also has now made other comments about how she thought she wasn’t going to be the centerpiece of the story, but in this tweet brings up other things not mentioned in the story (less serious than what was in the story) that she appears to imply she is surprised they didn’t include.  So which is it, is she upset she was the centerpiece or is she upset they didn’t include more of her claims?  

Speaking of her surprise at being the centerpiece of the story, she’s made comments that she thought Racicot’s allegations would be more prominent.  But as the story noted, Racicot acknowledged she did not elaborate about what happened to the NYT, so why would Fifield expect Racicot’s allegations to be more prominent when Fifield is acknowledging that she was “overwhelming” them with her own claims?

Finally, she apparently went to the NYT with the initial claims on her own, but is only now adding additional claims about the condom removal.  Why didn’t she include those claims initially?

Well, this is all over the Twitters -- surprised it didn't make your moderate feed.

I'm confident the NYT will agree with your moderate interpretation and publicly set the record straight.   

[TimHauck]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Well, this is all over the Twitters -- surprised it didn't make your moderate feed.

I'm confident the NYT will agree with your moderate interpretation and publicly set the record straight.   

I deleted Twitter.  

[jerryskids]

22 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I deleted Twitter.  

Where will you get your moderate posts from places like DropDeadBiased and the AP Hamas branch?

Regardless, I'll post it for you when the NYT does it.   

[TimHauck]

7 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Where will you get your moderate posts from places like DropDeadBiased and the AP Hamas branch?

Regardless, I'll post it for you when the NYT does it.   

Set the record straight about what?  Whether or not they called 5 different people to ask about an arm-grabbing incident from a decade ago?  Heck, why would she even provide the other two and then say well they won’t be able to corroborate?

[EternalShinyAndChrome]

2 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yeah. He’s pretty low IQ, even for a liberal. 

Don't smear low IQ people like that.

[dogcows]

Good riddance to the (alleged) Nazi rapist. Wish we could get rid of the one in the White House too. But his party actually seems to like such qualities in a candidate.

[jerryskids]

25 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Set the record straight about what?  Whether or not they called 5 different people to ask about an arm-grabbing incident from a decade ago?  Heck, why would she even provide the other two and then say well they won’t be able to corroborate?

She discusses a pattern of his behavior way beyond "an arm grabbing incident from a decade ago."  The NYT didn't report it.  And that is what you choose to still believe.  I'd ask you to connect the dots you are missing -- It's a "but this one goes to eleven" situation.  But I'm not very confident.

[Mark Davis]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Well, this is all over the Twitters -- surprised it didn't make your moderate feed.

I'm confident the NYT will agree with your moderate interpretation and publicly set the record straight.   

There were people here posting there was more.  It was discussed on a podcast I follow at the time of the initial NY Times story on how they weren't telling the full depth and all the stories.  Even the guests from the Democratic side were saying openly that there was more to that and they had heard more.  I posted about there being more at the time.  It was said because of that.  One of the people who advised Fifeld was also a guest on that show and said he advised her at the time to not talk to the NY Times that they'd short sell it, and they did.  They dampened down the story.

[Mark Davis]

I just watched Platner's video, had been out at a poker game all night.  He didn't do the Democratic Party any big favors.  I don't honestly know how the replacement nominee can get the share of his supporters that they will need.  He stated he's suspending his campaign because "of the structures being taken away from us by those in power".  He talked about how he won and "now they are not going to let us have it".

[seafoam1]

On 5/19/2026 at 3:13 PM, thegeneral said:

He’s not a Nazi. I’d vote for him over Susan Collins.

Everyone knows you would. Because the mindless creampuffs on the left does what they are told to do by their liberal  masters. 

[TimHauck]

6 hours ago, jerryskids said:

She discusses a pattern of his behavior way beyond "an arm grabbing incident from a decade ago."  The NYT didn't report it.  And that is what you choose to still believe.  I'd ask you to connect the dots you are missing -- It's a "but this one goes to eleven" situation.  But I'm not very confident.

Wrong.  They did include some of her other claims.  But let’s include the full context of the “could not corroborate” phrasing:

could not corroborate the physical altercations or the most controversial comments she described.

 

They didn’t say they couldn’t corroborate anything, and they even said Fifield, Racicot (who of course was named in the article even though for some reason @Strike incorrectly thinks she wasn’t), and the anonymous woman “described their relationship in similar terms.”    

This is still such an odd argument to me.  Fifield herself admits to not telling the NYT initially about some of her most serious allegations, and also:

was quick to note that he “never hit me, he never punched me.”

 

Yet you’re accusing the NYT of protecting him.  This feels like an argument you’d accuse me of making.

[TimHauck]

5 hours ago, Mark Davis said:

There were people here posting there was more.  It was discussed on a podcast I follow at the time of the initial NY Times story on how they weren't telling the full depth and all the stories.  Even the guests from the Democratic side were saying openly that there was more to that and they had heard more.  I posted about there being more at the time.  It was said because of that.  One of the people who advised Fifeld was also a guest on that show and said he advised her at the time to not talk to the NY Times that they'd short sell it, and they did.  They dampened down the story.

What podcast?  Did you name the podcast at the time? I see you made some vague comments about there being more with nothing to back it up, and one post saying someone said it “that you follow and has been right in the past.”  You should have included more details, because “people here” shouldn’t automatically be believed, there were also people here saying Obama is going to be charged with treason, Bill Gates is going to be indicted, Trump is going to confirm aliens are real, that Fauci only refused to testify because Gabbard publicized documents that were already released, etc.  You can’t really believe most people here.

[Frozenbeernuts]

It is not out of the realm of possibility that the entire party knew about everything, and they just wanted to swap him with a more radical lefty. They know their own voters cannot see through the illusion, so it's not a big deal any more to feed them any amount of lies or excuses.

[seafoam1]

I predict platner gets pissed off after having a few too many cosmopolitans and looks up an old girlfriend and pays a visit. He starts tossing her around and she 911s his ass and the left never brings up his name again. 

Or did that already happen? 

[HellToupee]

A grassroots movement created by a lie

 

[seafoam1]

1 minute ago, HellToupee said:

A grassroots movement created by a lie

If liberals didn't have lies, they wouldn't have anything to say. 

[seafoam1]

I didn't realize he officially quit. Nice. Who's the next up commie they throw in there without regard to the voters wants. 

[Caine Mutiny]

9 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

A grassroots movement created by a lie

 

Yeah this isn’t accurate. 
 

Platner may be gone but there is still a desire among Democratic voters for progressive, populist candidates with no ties to the Dem establishment, who aren’t defensive about woke stuff and who are critical of Israel. It’s all over the country and it’s going to win elections. It’s definitely a movement. 

[Caine Mutiny]

12 hours ago, Strike said:

Yet you were here commenting in this thread.  Commenting in threads like this when you're ignorant of the facts is the definition of TROLL so the next time you wonder why people call you a TROLL, now you know........

No. You’re wrong and you’re a hypocrite. 
 

You’re wrong because none of my posts about Platner were about his scandals. They were about his populism, about his electoral chances, and about the wave coming in November. 
 

You’re a hypocrite because you spent nearly a whole page here going back and digging up quotes of people who thought Platner would win prior to this latest scandal- for no purpose other than to gloat- THAT is the definition of a troll. 

[seafoam1]

On 5/19/2026 at 2:31 PM, Caine Mutiny said:

You know he’s going to win right? 

[HellToupee]

16 minutes ago, Caine Mutiny said:

Yeah this isn’t accurate. 
 

Platner may be gone but there is still a desire among Democratic voters for progressive, populist candidates with no ties to the Dem establishment, who aren’t defensive about woke stuff and who are critical of Israel. It’s all over the country and it’s going to win elections. It’s definitely a movement. 

What isn’t accurate about it?  Platner was a packaged fabrication crafted in NY. He wasn’t even an oyster farmer 

[HellToupee]

libs in this thread were clueless about Katz but  @Hardcore troubadour knew . A created playable character that the puppet masters were going to ride to the top

 

[seafoam1]

4 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

libs in this thread were clueless about Katz but  @Hardcore troubadour knew . A created playable character that the puppet masters were going to ride to the top

 

The guy looks like Thurman Munson. 

[seafoam1]

This is really fun watching the democrat socialist party just fall apart. 

[Frozenbeernuts]

Yet again, they rely on the blindness of their voters to follow the agenda. It is beyond blatant at this point. There are lefties who have deleted their tweets from not that far back supporting Platner. They are gaslighting everyone.

It's pure evil at work. But liberals like to vote for evil, so we shouldn't be surprised.