Whom he only had to avoid being drafted.

Why? It isn't like Clooney broke news, they all *knew* it privately. They saw the same things we did and they were out lying about it just like Trump's people are. Our ire should be reseeves for those who didn't speak up long before then.

I voted for Kamala despite misgivings about how she'd handle Gaza because I *knew* what trump would do, and elsewhere. I hated the pragmatism but the threat was too great. This isn't the same obv but the echoes are there.

good chance to beat Collins, and they didn't want more voices calling for an end to arms to israel in the Senate. I am a proponent of principle over pragmatism in voting so we don't end up in the place we are. But if I were a main voter this would be a challenge to my thinking.

And some reddit history that should give us some pause. But our other options are a sitting senator actively enabling this administration and a geriatric Democrat that endorses genocide who is being propped up by the party, who likely dug up this dirt on Platner because he actually had a /2

I am struggling with this one. I am inclined to agree we can't trust him with power in this moment, the stakes are too high. But also, it feels like main's choices are the guy who has been openly calling out israel for genocide and a vocal opponent of the alt right with a contradictory tattoo /1

Tapper, OTOH, is allegedly a journallist and that's his job to report on. He made it a hobby horse with a candidate that could handle criticism, even tried to profit from it. But now, suddenly, he is nowhere to be found.

In Clooney's defense, he was concerned as someone inside the party. He was doing what someone in the GOP should've done during the campaign but lacked the courage to do. And what the DNC should've done at the *start* of the campaign. Him saying Trump has dementia would not carry that weight.

Some people even now will not care about the economy but do still care a *lot* about justice. If we assume everyone is the same 1:1 we will miss the mark too often.

But only for large scale messaging. One on one it is so important to *listen* to people, find out who they are and what matters, and connect the dots on how our current directions impacts them in ways that matter.

Any attempt to fix a single issue is going to miss. Economics would've been a mistake earlier in the year. Most wouldn't believe it or be able to conceptualize the pain. The files were the right topic for the time. Now the pain is being felt and it's the right time to talk about that.

Translation: he's going to support Cuomo and doesn't want that story in the press any longer than necessary.

If you don't understand that normal folks are reading this and having their views of progressives influenced by how we treat people -- regardless of this not being "the real world" --then I don't think I'm the one you should be worried about.

Fair criticism. I had read about it already elsewhere, and didn't click through and read this article as well before engaging. That's on me.

I agree with this. The way some people are talking though reads more like they want to force him out entirely. Like they're unwilling to even give him space to do the work.

Ah yes, the neo-nazis famously are generous towards others, believe in our capacity to grow and change, and want to cheer for those who are trying to be better humans.

Hmm. I haven't seen that part of the story. That is discouraging.

I can accept that. Things are gross right now and if he is who he says he is, he should understand this and accept it gracefully. It'd be a good test. I just don't love that my feed reads like we should ostracize him as a *person*.

If by toss to the curb you mean, as a candidate, fine. politics is a gross game and the stakes are high. But as a *person* are you really that quick to throw someone out as a *person* who would be our ally, who has rejected their past actions and whose intervening life seems consistent with that?