don't worry about it man
08.03.2026 00:59
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 1
📌 0
don't worry about it man
If you can't be bothered, here are some round-ups. But I'm sure you still won't be bothered. You seem to be commenting along one strange...not particularly relevant theme.
azmirror.com/2026/03/02/g...
www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpa...
dude do you...not know about that? like are you disputing that it's a thing?
Plus...do I believe you that Mills said that? idk. I've seen you quote one person and it was not accurate. Links or GTFO.
It's WILD that you'd post this as though it's a flex.
YOU'RE BOTH AT 44% GRAHAM.
What is this supposed to mean? Where's the other 4% if it's you on the ballot? Are you saying there's a third candidate who's fine with Mills but hates you?
Also the general is in 9 months, chill out it's 4%.
MILLS. Why is nobody talking about Janet "See You In Court" Mills???
wait but what about how he was just on that antisemitic conspiracy theory podcast, that he said he was a longtime fan of, and also he enthusiastically retweeted a Neo-Nazi? wouldn't you say that bodes ill for who might influence him in the Senate? much like Collins?
[citation needed]
It's just...why SENATOR? If people like that this guy's not really good at stuff, but he's got a beard and he says "billionaires are bad, pass me a brewski," can't he say that in Maine? How will that help anyone in DC--including him?? Won't he miss his oysters??
I think the answer is that 1) some libs/lefties adore the idea of a scruffy populist wooing the yokels, cuz they want to believe most Republican voters just *never heard it put that way before* and 2) people hate experienced women. Just, absolutely hate.
And if you're gonna make an anti-establishment, lesser-of-two-evils argument for *Senate,* at least say how that might WORK, right? How the other option is a greater evil, right? Cuz Mills seems pretty ballsy, and the job here is pretty specific.
Folks are in love with useless tiktok clips.
And in what way is Janet Mills the greater evil?? She's the one who told Trump *to his face* that she'd see him in court rather than throw trans kids under the bus. Is that not the hero we want in the Senate???
Thank god the Secretary of State was there.
Whoops I almost just confused this with a politics thread.
And people don't change their minds based on the rationality of the arguments. People don't want to change their minds at all--it actually makes our brains feel bad.
Not your fault! Just genuinely not sure if I was doing it wrong.
Like the interviewer even prefaced the question with that: that Mills had the backbone to stand up to Trump on this, and that some people think that's hurting her in the polls. If Platner were *actually* addressing that, wouldn't it stop hurting Mills in the polls?
How did we get here? Slate *pulls* a hypothetical answer out of him--he shows no actual interest in the topic--and people call him the only Dem with backbone. Meanwhile Mills, his opponent, told Trump TO HIS FACE that she'd see him in court over trans rights.
How do mediocre men cast such a spell.
Which level of backbone, exactly? I can't tell if he's ever actually said this to anyone, whereas his primary opponent told Trump *to his face* that she'd see him in court rather than throws trans kids under the bus.
(or you could just tell me if you've posted about Platner recently)
hey @wonkettemedia.bsky.social! is it possible to search your posts these days? I click the magnifying glass at wonkette.com, and enter a search term, and it routs me to the substack landing page, where I seem only to be able to search all of substack. am I le dumb?
The left needs to recalibrate--tare the scale, if you will.
Can we all just watch even 40 seconds of Hillary's deposition, and each say out loud, "God I wish she'd been our President."
It'd be like our cogito ergo sum. We could build discourse from a base of shared reality. I think it'd help.
This is why it drives me CRAZY whenever people suggest that Persuasion should be an Intelligence skill. That's the saddest, most hilarious delusion.
Claude is roleplaying sentience, and it's handlers are such anti-social dweebs, they can't tell the difference.
Carney is definitely full tinfoil hat! But yeah you get what I'm saying: that's the kind of thing it'd take. That's a sovereign of His Majesty's Commonwealth. And to Trump...that's a proper white country. I think his people find ways to bump it down the list. (Mexico too, since it's next door.)
The question is: China.
So what I'm saying is: Trump has already kidnapped a sovereign leader, killed another, and vowed to do more...in non-Europe, non-China, non-Japan. In the next three years, if he doesn't directly attack a nuclear power and/or EU member, who will step up? What would that mechanism even be?
(Canada, then as now, was a mensch. Committed early and hard.)
There was no realization, no team. Germany broke its treaties, invaded Poland, then invaded everywhere else. The UK was left, Italy declared war on them too, and they were fighting *alone* until Japan bombed the US and Germany turned on the Soviets.
