Shannon Watts, a Democratic strategist and gun control advocate, criticized newly influential progressive figures online on Friday, claiming they are trying to overlook her past controversial statements.
She believes that far-left streamer Hasan Piker has employed a similar tactic to downplay his own statements following backlash on social media.
In a post, Watts summarized Piker’s justifications as a kind of “defense bingo card” that includes phrases like, “It’s a joke, it’s satire, it’s taken out of context, it was years ago,” and more excuses like “English is my second language” or claims of “malicious clippings.”
Piker, despite acknowledging the backlash, quickly responded. He accused his critics of acting like Republican operatives and called them frauds who care little for the Democratic party’s success.
Fred Guttenberg, a gun control advocate and father of a Parkland shooting victim, retorted that Piker is merely mimicking MAGA tactics and criticized his comparison of the NRA to AIPAC, calling it “disgusting and insane.”
The back-and-forth between Watts and Piker highlights concerns among some Democrats regarding problematic past comments and social media posts by progressive figures.
For instance, some scrutiny around former Senate candidate Graham Platner arose after a Reddit post that led to a sexual assault allegation. Michigan’s Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed has also faced criticism for calling to defund the police. This raises questions about whether Democratic leaders should be more accountable for their previous statements.
Watts, who has dedicated much of her last 14 years to advocating for gun control, recently argued that Democrats are ignoring candidates’ problematic online histories, potentially harming their credibility.
It’s worth noting that Piker, although not a candidate himself, has made headlines because of his controversial comments—especially given his support for El-Sayed and other progressives.
In 2019, Piker made headlines for declaring that “America deserved 9/11” and later retracted that statement, calling it “inappropriate.” When asked if he supported terrorism, he clarified that he didn’t support either the U.S. or Israel.
The conflict between Watts and Piker reignited after the University of Washington announced the cancellation of events with him due to his past remarks about Israel.
Piker criticized the platform X and stated that Democrats should uphold First Amendment rights, arguing that Trumpism must be opposed, particularly in terms of protecting free speech.
Watts countered that Piker’s advocacy for rights seems inconsistent, recalling instances where Piker actually encouraged Trump to “lock up” political opponents like Adam Schiff.
Piker has frequently criticized Schiff for accepting donations from AIPAC, which he believes does not adequately address U.S.-Israel relations.
Additionally, in a 2019 rant, he verbally attacked Schiff for raising funds for a defense contractor, punctuating it with explicit language. When confronted about his past statements, Piker claimed they were just jokes.
Democratic commentators questioned the nature of his humor, highlighting that his intent often seems serious. Piker has not replied to queries regarding whether his past comments are taken seriously within the party or at which point online criticisms should disqualify a candidate.
