So, for the last few days since the Maine primaries finished, all I have been hearing is how "awful" Platner is. I don't know all that much about him as I don't live in Maine. But there are a few things people need to start thinking about, whether they like it or not.
First, people are not paragons of virtue. No one is ever going to line up exactly with what you believe the right candidate should be. If you look critically, you are going to find "problems" with every candidate who runs for office.
With that being said there are few other important points. The accusations are important, and may or may not be true. After all, if they are true then they are a pretty good indicator of the man's character. However, I hate how people demand purity especially when anyone makes an accusation of something. No proof has yet been provided in many cases and yet some move to demand that someone in power resign for the greater good. This political purity could easily lead opposition to assume that if an accusation is bad enough then the accused may just step aside whether they did it or not simply because of the outcry.
I am not saying Platner is innocent, just that no one is perfect, even a candidate whose ideas you may have aligned with.
The thing is, the accusations have started, and they are likely to get worse. Who benefits from this? Collins surely, but also the republican party, and everyone wishing the destruction of America. Platner isn't likely to step aside at this point, but the constant accusations are going to depress excitement from democratic voters. Whether they are true or not, the purists aren't going to vote for Platner.
Here's the problem with that. Collins will win. Republicans will likely retain control of the Senate. Trump will continue to get away with everything he is doing now. Like him or hate him, it is time democrats and independents become pragmatic. Which of these two people are worse for the country?
I am not a Maine voter so my opinion doesn't matter all that much, but this is something those who have the ability to vote there must consider. Which of these two people and their parties will do the least amount of damage to the country until the next election? Collins is a known commodity. We know exactly what she is likely to do in any given situation. She will say something along the lines of how bad something is, but most of the time she will go right along with that evil thing because her party demands it. Platner has problems as well, but his party isn't trying to turn the country into a Christian nationalist fascism.
The question ultimately comes down to a simple choice. Is it better to keep the devil you know or put a new one into power until the next election comes along? Plenty of people are going to tell you that we can't accept someone like Platner to serve, despite men like Trump and Johnson already doing so and tearing the country apart for their own ends. Some of the people bringing this problem up are going to be genuinely upset about Platner, but I can also swear that a lot of those people complaining about Platner are going to be republican operatives openly or in disguise. They understand the stakes involved. If they want to keep power without resorting to open force, they need you depressed and unwilling to vote against them. Sometimes doing the right thing involves bad choices, and we have to choose the least bad option. Sometimes you just have to keep moving the boulder to get it into the position you need. That way, you later get the chance to move it where that boulder can actually do good.
baratheonpilled
2087
tangentwithtanner
origamiaround
dededos
jacobvanloon
kaledo-art
yousharknotpass
