toplayinla.bsky.social
toplayinla.bsky.social
@toplayinla.bsky.social
1 followers 5 following 220 posts
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Have repeatedly said he isn't a good candidate you dunce
You are literally just making up stats.
Saying "i don't have proof but the vibes are off" would have a lot shorter and honest.
That's fine to think that: just don't make that argument by citing bogus outlets and speculatation.
Jewish Insider has a history of islamophobic reporting and is owned by Max Neuberger, who is on the board of directors of ADL. They are not a reputable source.

And if you actually read my comment, you'd see I believe his ignorance alone is disqualifying.

www.adl.org/staff/max-ne...
www.adl.org
Reposted by toplayinla.bsky.social
redemption arcs do not need to include a senate seat. and they should not.
Suggesting that Platner knew for years and covered it up but is somehow not a Nazi sympathizer by extension is silly. People are only now backtracking that insinuation because it's becoming obvious he's simply an idiot.
I would refer you to my first comment.
Condemning misinformation is not "splitting hairs"
And why is there this fixation on clearing a bar that doesn't need to be cleared to declare Platner disqualifying? Why can't people say "idc if you didn't know. That is a disqualifying level of ignorance when fascism poses an existential threat to the country and our most vulnerable Americans?"
Based on what? People keep insisting he "must" have known but I dare anyone who asserts that as fact to turn to anyone not online and ask them if they have even heard of the totenkopf let alone describe it. Why is it presumed it's as widely known as the swastika?
I have to wonder how many people had even heard of the totenkopf before yesterday, or could even physically describe it *now*.
Where is the evidence he knew it's meaning before last month? If people want to say his ignorance is disqualifying, that's reasonable. It's not reasonable to posit he definitely knew based on what amounts to vibes.
He should drop out, but you will never convince me people are not more than the worst thing they've done or that misinformation is a good thing. There's is something deeply upsetting how many people are fine with simply lying to gild the lilly.
No one is "defending the tattoo": his defenders are making the case ignorance is an acceptable excuse. If that's not good enough for you, that's not only fine, I agree with it.
Cannot understand this insistence on being willfully obtuse about the nature of Platner's tattoo and his defenders. It's a very easy/grounded case to say "even a face value reading of Platner's mea culpa is disqualifying b/c that is an intolerable level of ignorance for a Dem US senate candidate"
They are not doing that! Why are people so adamant about misrepresenting the facts of the case? Why can't it be "even a face value reading of Platner's mea culpa is still disqualifying"? Why must we make up accusations?
You cheered on the Wagner group's coup in Russia and deleted it once you learned of their Nazi associations. You don't have any moral highground here.
Roundabout way of admitting you were wrong by moving the goalposts from implying he knew to being ignorant of the meaning.