Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner tried to inject himself into mounting frustration surrounding the Boston Red Sox and was instead shut down by Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy, who accused Platner of being a Nazi over a controversial tattoo and rejected efforts to promote the campaign’s anti-private-equity message. The controversy erupted after Platner released a political advertisement attacking Red Sox ownership and the growing role of private equity in American life. The ad aired during a Red Sox broadcast on NESN before reportedly being pulled during the fourth inning. “Private equity is taking our homes. It’s taking our hospitals. It’s taking beloved local businesses and stripping them for parts,” Platner wrote on X while promoting the ad. “And now private equity is running the Red Sox into the ground.” In a follow-up post, Platner claimed the commercial had been removed midgame because the Red Sox owns the network. “Yesterday we started running this ad during the Red Sox game,” he wrote. “Midway through the game the ad was taken down by the station.” But the story escalated after Portnoy publicly shared emails from Platner’s political team attempting to secure coverage from Barstool ahead of the ad launch. In the emails, strategist Jeff Coote pitched Platner as a populist candidate willing to confront “big bad John Henry” and private equity interests tied to the Red Sox organization. One message described the campaign as “an example of Graham’s populist streak and talking about s— people are pissed off about.” The ad itself framed Platner as a candidate battling corporate consolidation in sports and broader American life. “Private equity is destroying our favorite baseball team, stripping them for parts,” the ad states. “Private equity is buying up our homes, our sports, and our lives. I will reverse the private equity curse.” It closes with a direct appeal to frustrated Red Sox fans: “I approve this message because I miss Mookie Betts.”  Portnoy, however, immediately redirected the conversation away from baseball and toward Platner’s earlier controversies surrounding a tattoo linked to Nazi imagery. “Now this is the Nazi guy right?” Portnoy responded in the email chain. “Yeah I’d be happy to talk to him about that tattoo and him being a Nazi. I’m not as interested in his baseball takes.” After Platner’s team attempted to cool the exchange by saying they would consider it “if we can get to a place where this is a productive convo,” Portnoy fired back again. “You reached out to a Jew to poo poo a Nazi,” Portnoy wrote. “I’m not Bernie Sanders. If your boy isn’t a Nazi and can handle me 1 on 1 in a convo set it up.” Portnoy later posted portions of the exchange publicly on X, adding: “And I’m still wondering why your team thought I’d want to play footsy with a guy who is a Nazi?” And I’m still wondering why your team thought I’d want to play footsy with a guy who is a Nazi? https://t.co/DxPZp0sZSt pic.twitter.com/LItqRDIDjg — Dave Portnoy (@stoolpresidente) May 23, 2026 The confrontation added yet another controversy to a campaign that has already drawn attention for issues far removed from traditional Senate politics. Earlier this year, Platner faced backlash over a tattoo on his chest resembling the Nazi “Totenkopf,” or “Death’s Head,” symbol historically associated with the SS. Platner denied any connection to Nazism during an interview with Pod Save America, saying the tattoo stemmed from a drunken decision while deployed overseas as a Marine. “I am not a secret Nazi,” Platner said at the time, describing himself as a “lifelong opponent” of antisemitism and racism. The tattoo controversy was compounded by resurfaced Reddit posts in which Platner described himself as a communist, mocked a Purple Heart recipient, and made inflammatory anti-police remarks. Republicans seized on the posts as evidence of what they argued was a radical political worldview. Against that backdrop, what began as an attempt to channel populist frustration over billionaire sports ownership instead became another flashpoint in the broader debate surrounding Platner’s candidacy, political identity, and increasingly controversial public image.

Donald Trump has once again taken over the internet. No, not the president of the United States. The albino buffalo from Bangladesh. Nicknamed after the commander-in-chief, this rare animal has become a local celebrity in the city of Narayanganj and a viral sensation online because of its uncanny resemblance to Trump, particularly its blond combover. Crowds have flocked to the farm to catch a glimpse of the unique buffalo, with videos and photos flooding social media. Ziauddin Mridha, the farm owner who purchased the animal from a cattle market ten months ago, said he didn’t notice the resemblance at first. “My younger brother jokingly named it Donald Trump after seeing the hair on its head,” Mridha told NDTV. “It is very calm in nature. Albino buffaloes are generally peaceful and do not become aggressive unless provoked,” Mridha added. Depending on who you ask, the same could probably be said for the real Trump.

Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner is refusing to apologize after resurfaced online posts appeared to show him mocking a Purple Heart recipient who was almost killed in a firefight with the Taliban. Platner was confronted near his home in Sullivan, Maine, and asked whether he regretted a since-deleted Reddit post in which he said wounded Army veteran Ted Daniels “didn’t deserve to live,” according to Fox News. Platner initially refused to answer directly before attempting to defend his own military record, referring to the accusations as “slanderous and offensive.” “I did four tours in the infantry, any attempt to say that I disrespect veterans is slanderous and offensive,” Platner responded. The outlet asked Platner if he owed Daniels an apology. The Democratic candidate remained defiant, saying, “Do you know how many of my friends have Purple Hearts? Do you know how many of my friends got wounded? Yeah, a lot of them, thank you.” The post, written in 2019, was a brutal takedown of a viral video from the helmet-cam of Pfc. Ted Daniels, during a 2012 firefight with the Taliban, The Daily Wire previously reported. Daniels received a Purple Heart after being shot four times during that firefight — but Platner argued in a post attributed to his old account, “P-hustle,” that Daniels did not “deserve to live” because he’d made “sh*t” decisions in combat. “This video never gets old,” the commentary began. “Dumb motherf*cker didn’t deserve to live. At least his stupidity and fat-*ss wheezing are available for all future infantrymen to witness and hold in contempt. Poor marksmanship on the Taliban’s part is the only reason this mouth breather made it home, he managed to make every possible sh*t decision possible when it comes to small unit combat.” The Platner’s comments have received significant backlash. He is currently backed by progressive Democrats, including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Veterans groups, Republican officials, and former military servicemembers have condemned his comments, Fox News reported.

Let’s just get right into it: if you clicked on this piece, we’re on the same page. You don’t need me to explain that Hollywood keeps pumping out moralizing slop for blue hairs and wine moms. You don’t need me to explain why that’s both boring and dangerous. But if you’re here, you might need some suggestions for your next binge. I’m happy to help. But first, a few caveats. I’m not including classic TV shows like “The Waltons” or “Father Knows Best.” These shows are obviously not woke, so putting them on this list would be like putting a hospital chapel on a list of worst first date spots. I’m also not including “24” or “Band of Brothers” because I know you’ve already seen them. Nor am I listing game shows or singing competitions or professional sports, all of which are inherently apolitical — although maybe not so much anymore with the NFL. Finally, just because these shows are not woke doesn’t mean they are explicitly conservative. Some of them have jokes about Republicans, and pretty much all of their stars and creators are huge liberals — we’re talking about Hollywood, after all. I acknowledge that, but still think these shows are great. Consider yourself warned. Landman You had to know this would be on the list. Billy Bob Thornton stars as a Texas oilman battling Mexican cartels and environmental regulators while looking out for his wife and daughter and guzzling Dr. Pepper. His character, Tommy Norris, is proudly not politically correct, loves smoking cigarettes, and is vigilant about his sobriety — although Michelob Ultra doesn’t count. “Landman” is, like all properties in “Yellowstone” creator Taylor Sheridan’s ever-expanding universe, a show by, for, and about real Americans. The Man In The High Castle This Amazon Prime show imagines a world where the Axis Powers won World War II, and the Nazis and Imperial Japanese divide up the United States. Nothing reminds you of the essential role America has played in defending freedom more than imagining a world where Washington, D.C. is a nuclear crater, and Swastikas fly in Times Square. Rufus Sewell delivers the performance of a lifetime as Obergruppenführer John Smith, an all-American man turned high-ranking Nazi official, whose rejection of his heritage and embrace of fascism slowly eats away at his family and his conscience. Frasier The “Cheers” spinoff stars (prominent conservative!) Kelsey Grammer as Dr. Frasier Crane, a snobby but lovable psychiatrist putting his life back together after a divorce. Sophisticated and smart but never condescending or preachy, watching “Frasier” is like spending an evening in a more civilized time. And while vulgarity was not a dealbreaker for placement on this list — looking at you, Taylor Sheridan — ”Frasier” is refreshingly genteel, devoid of profanity and bluster. 30 Rock Tina Fey’s sendup of “Saturday Night Live” is the greatest sitcom of the 21st century for a number of reasons, but two in particular landed it on this list. The first is Alec Baldwin’s scotch-swilling, hippie-hating, Republican-boosting titan of industry, Jack Donaghy. Is this character a liberal’s caricature of a conservative? Yes. Does that change the fact that he is the show’s indisputable moral compass? No. This brings us to the second thing that makes this show borderline conservative: it’s a seven-season story of one woman’s quest to get married and have children. Liz Lemon (Fey) begins the show as a single, quirky artist who loves feminism and living alone in a crappy apartment. Ultimately, with Jack forcing her to be honest with herself, she finds love, has kids, and achieves financial success. It’s the best defense of bourgeois morality since “Democracy in America.” Silo Another dystopian drama that highlights the blessings of liberty by imagining a world where it has disappeared. “Silo” is, literally, about a silo: a massive underground bunker where the last remnants of humanity live under the thumb of a merciless surveillance state. Our protagonists don’t know why the silo was built or what happened to the world outside, only that they can’t leave. But even in this hermetically sealed environment, people yearn for truth and freedom — and that yearning has consequences. An aside: if you, like Daily Wire editor-in-chief Brent Scher, find yourself “bored as hell” two episodes into “Silo,” try “Paradise.” Similar concept, way more action, and significantly less depressing. Gilmore Girls This isn’t the most conservative show of all time, but it’s definitely the most pro-life. The entire premise hinges on the notion that a freewheeling bad girl chooses not to abort her unplanned teenage pregnancy, and instead throws herself into becoming a mom. Having children is always portrayed as an unalloyed good in “Gilmore Girls,” and essentially every female character has a motherhood arc. But “Gilmore Girls” is also about the value of classical education, the importance of local government, and the virtues of masculinity. The show’s universe also operates on a pretty old-school moral code: good deeds are rewarded, and bad deeds are punished. Bonus points because this show appeals to all ages and genders — something you can’t really say for “Band of Brothers.” Derry Girls That’s right, more girls! Set in Ireland in the 1990s, “Derry Girls” follows a group of high school friends working their way through adolescence in the midst of The Troubles. Though it’s clear that the girls’ lives are shaped by the turmoil of Northern Ireland, they never talk about politics — they’re just regular teenagers. They spend most of their time trying to pull one over on their parents or Sister Michael, the fantastically droll headmistress of their school. “Derry Girls” is funny and poignant, and maybe the best depiction of cultural Catholicism ever put on television. The only downside is that it’s a BBC show, which means there are only 19 episodes across three seasons. The British really do ruin everything. For All Mankind What if the Russians beat us to the moon by just a few days? That’s the premise of “For All Mankind,” a sprawling alternate history of the United States from 1969 on. The first few seasons of this show are like “The Right Stuff” on steroids: riskier space missions, interstellar gunfights with the Soviets, you name it. As we get closer to the present, things get admittedly squishier: there’s a strong implication that increased government funding of science can end racism, for instance. But even as the generations change, the OG astronauts remain on the scene to warn about the dangers of “progress” and remind everyone that the Soviets are evil. You’ll want to watch this one with an ice-cold can of Schlitz. The Righteous Gemstones A profane parody of a megachurch pastor and his family may not seem like it belongs on this list, but bear with me. Creator Danny McBride, who also stars as the eldest Gemstone child, clearly knows and loves the type of people he’s poking fun at. And so while the Gemstones are greedy and selfish and over-the-top, deep down they’re good. More importantly, the patriarch pastor, Eli (played to perfection by John Goodman), is never suggested to be lying about his beliefs. “The Righteous Gemstones” respects and takes the Christian faith seriously, even as it mocks it. And the characters grow over time, learning to become better parents, children, and, ultimately, Christians. That’s a pretty remarkable thing in today’s media landscape. Plus, Walton Goggins’s performance as the Gemstone kids’ uncle, Baby Billy Freeman, is one for the record books. Girls Relax, I’m kidding! Lena Dunham is the worst. Here, watch this “Frasier” joke that’s so un-PC it would get a show canceled today.

This piece is part of MI x DW, a collaboration that brings Daily Wire readers exclusive commentary and research from the Manhattan Institute’s world-class team of scholars. Since 2016, governments, media, and tech companies have warned about online disinformation targeting adults. Far less attention has been paid to the information tools increasingly shaping children, even as such “kid-safe” platforms become more embedded into the internet’s trust infrastructure. One significant child-focused platform, Kiddle, delivers a striking pattern of geopolitical and ideological framing that softens authoritarian regimes and extremist movements while presenting itself as a trusted educational resource. Foreign terrorist organizations, like Hamas and Hezbollah, are whitewashed. Russia’s war on Ukraine is downgraded to a “military operation,” mirroring Kremlin language, while Joseph Stalin’s role in Russian history is reduced to his success in building a “strong, modern nation.” Launched in 2014, Kiddle, which bills itself as a visual search engine for kids, appears prominently in Google searches, often ranking near the top of results. When asked for child-safe educational resources, ChatGPT recommended Kiddle alongside legacy institutions like Encyclopædia Britannica, World Book, National Geographic, and the Smithsonian. While it boasts far less traffic than other search engines, Kiddle’s role in information infrastructure gives it outsize influence, as schools, libraries, and even PTAs link to the site. The International Society for Technology in Education (ITSE), an association with 100,000 education stakeholders, recommends Kiddle on its website, noting that “results are vetted by editors.” The top referrer of traffic to Kiddle in early 2026 was DiscoveryK12, an online homeschool curriculum. Yet the content is less kid-friendly than expected. The platform’s article on Vladimir Putin, for example, offers a softened portrayal of the Russian president. Putin is presented as a peacemaker who is “known for ending the Second Chechen War.” When it comes to Putin’s successive wars of territorial conquest, Kiddle users learn only that under Putin, Russia “took control of Crimea” and “supported a war in eastern Ukraine.” While the need to present information to children in simple language can be appreciated, this characterization is jarringly at odds with nearly a decade of horrific warfare. “Hamas facts for kids” informs young readers that “Hamas grew out of an Islamic charity” and supports “Palestinian nationalism,” meaning that it “believe[s] in the idea of a Palestinian nation.” Kiddle says that the U.S.-designated terrorist group’s “fight is with Zionists.” The word “terrorist” is mentioned just once, at the bottom of the article. Former Hamas leader and October 7 planner Yahya Sinwar is portrayed as a “very important leader” who “said he wanted to work for ‘peaceful, popular resistance’ against the Israeli presence.” Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, meanwhile, is “a special part of Iran’s military” whose goal is to “protect the Islamic Revolution.” Curious kids will also learn that the IRGC “work[s] to keep the country stable.” The late Ayatollah Khamenei, Kiddle claims, “supported Iran’s nuclear program for peaceful uses.” He was also a “strong supporter of the Persian language” with a penchant for poetry. No mention is made of the 2025-2026 protests during which state forces — acting at Khamenei’s direction — killed around 30,000 civilians. Occasionally, a Russo- and Sino-centric view of key conflicts and figures shines through. “Hassan Nasrallah facts for kids” acknowledges that Hezbollah has been designated a terrorist organization by the United States and the European Union, but it notes that “some countries like Russia and China have different views.” Kiddle even clarifies that Russia considers Hezbollah a “legal social and political organization.” “Uyghur people facts for kids” makes no mention of the genocide against China’s Muslim minority ethnic group, Chinese state-run concentration camps, or any of the abuses committed against these people. In a similar vein, the article on the Wuhan Institute of Virology leaves out the most important single fact about the center: it is considered the likely origin point of COVID-19. Despite positioning itself as a trusted educational resource for children, Kiddle reveals almost nothing about who controls its platform or how its editorial decisions are made. The site publicly identifies no editors, no leadership team, no ownership entity, and no meaningful editorial standards governing politically sensitive material presented to children. Ownership is obscured behind a U.S.-based privacy proxy. Kiddle does not disclose its founders, does not claim nonprofit status, and provides no public explanation of its governance structure despite operating as a heavily trafficked educational platform embedded across American schools and libraries. The site’s Google-adjacent branding makes understanding the nature of the platform much more difficult. Its search bar features the Google logo with the term “Custom Search.” In 2016, EdTech Magazine reported that while Kiddle was not affiliated with the search giant, its results “are powered by Google, tailored to the needs of kids.” The site’s name seems like a reference to Google, and its primary-color-heavy logo is a distinct echo of the search giant. Schools, libraries, educational blogs, and even professional educational organizations have repeatedly described Kiddle as a Google product or as “developed by Google.” Kiddle’s privacy policy states that the platform uses cookies “to personalize content and ads” and shares user information with advertising and analytics partners. That language raises a red flag concerning Google’s own advertising protections around child-directed services, which expressly forbid cookies that personalize ads. When I tested the site, Kiddle served children ads for cybersecurity threat reports, shopping extensions, mobile phone plans, steroid-related supplements, Robux acquisition guides, and other commercial content unrelated to education. Some ads solicited personal information directly through lead-generation forms — a clear violation of Google’s child-protection-related privacy policies. (Neither Kiddle nor Google responded to a request for comment for this article.) A 2016 investigation by EdSurge suggested that Russian-born entrepreneur Vladislav Golunov—previously associated with the search engine Lukol—may be the site’s creator. But a decade later, we still don’t know who owns, operates, or oversees the site. Kiddle has plans to expand into AI, with a new website, kiddle.ai, already live. Branded as “AI for kids,” the product is scheduled for release in July. DNS and hosting records show overlap between kiddle.ai and a subdomain, deepseek.kiddle.co, which references the Chinese AI company DeepSeek. While the exact relationship remains unclear, the appearance of Chinese AI branding alongside an opaque educational search platform with unknown ownership structures and problematic content raises further questions about who is building systems designed to engage kids at an important inflection point in the history of digital information. None of this establishes definitively that Kiddle has a relationship with America’s enemies. But it does underscore how little transparency exists around a platform increasingly trusted to mediate information for children. A search engine recommended by schools, surfaced by Google, and cited by AI systems operates with no publicly known editors, no disclosed governance structure, and no meaningful public accountability. That combination — institutional trust, opaque control, ideological framing, child targeting, AI amplification, and hidden governance — is what makes Kiddle more than just another strange corner of the internet. The platform has quietly embedded itself into the infrastructure through which children learn about war, politics, terrorism, and history. And almost nobody appears to know who is shaping that information, how those decisions are made, or whose interests it serves. *** This is republished with permission from the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal. The original can be found here. Ashley Rindsberg is an investigative journalist and founder of NPOV.