Controversy Surrounds Maine Senate Candidate Graham Platner

The support for Graham Platner, the Maine U.S. Senate candidate, among Democrats is under scrutiny. Reports about his past actions and statements raise questions about the extent of their backing.

In recent years, Platner has been linked to several unsettling incidents. He once bore a tattoo with Nazi imagery. In past online forums, he suggested that rape victims bear responsibility and labeled rural Americans “stupid” and “racist.” In 2019, he made disturbing remarks about U.S. Army Pfc. Ted Daniels, who was injured in Afghanistan, stating he didn’t deserve to live and expressing support for the Taliban. Platner asserts he’s overcome a “dark period” in his life, raising questions about when, if ever, this period ended.

Further revelations include his wife’s acknowledgment to campaign staff about Platner sending explicit messages to women via the app Kik as recently as last year. Such behavior raises more concerns about his past and which part of it constitutes the so-called “dark period.”

Now a New York Times story exposes more about Platner’s personality and none of it is good. The story itself is a very soft touch, careful not to say anything too terrible about the likely Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Maine. But the fact that the liberal outlet decided to run the story at all is evidence that there is something there.

The New York Times recently published an article delving into these issues, reflecting on Platner’s persona. Former girlfriend Lyndsey Fifield, a Virginia conservative, stated that Platner was aware of his tattoo’s Nazi roots. He reportedly admitted his unit chose the tattoo because it resonated with the Nazi Schutzstaffel, believing it symbolized their identity as fighters. This claim contradicts Platner’s narrative since October 2021, when he maintained the tattoo was a nonchalant choice he removed that same month. Fifield knew of the Nazi tattoo months before it became public knowledge, suggesting Platner always understood its implications.

Fifield described further troubling behavior, recounting physical constraints during arguments—behaviors many would categorize as abusive. Platner admitted to struggling with alcohol and being an imperfect partner during what he described as a “very dark period.”

Despite these revelations, Platner communicated with Democratic senators, asserting no further damaging stories exist. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren addressed the difference between personal issues and sexual assault allegations with him, to which Platner denied any credible accusations were forthcoming.

Given the timeline, concerns arise about what Democrats may overlook for the sake of opposing moderate Republican Susan Collins. The revelations about Platner unfold quickly, casting doubt on their thoroughness in vetting him. The situation poses significant challenges as they balance their political objectives with moral and ethical considerations.