Graham Platner’s primary victory in Maine means Democrats officially have their candidate in a race that is pivotal for their hopes of retaking the Senate.
But Platner isn’t a typical Democratic nominee. For reasons both personal and political, his candidacy has captivated national attention and become arguably the most-covered race happening this year.
That’s because Graham Platner is many things, and many people beyond just Maine have strong opinions about those things.
First off, he is indisputably a fresh (bearded) face for the party — a 41-year old populist who’s never run for anything before, who’s worked as an oyster farmer, who did three tours in Iraq with the Marines and also served in Afghanistan, and who presents as having a tough-guy affect. There are complications to Platner’s working-class credentials (he attended prep school and has relied on wealthy parents), but still, if he does well in November, it could strengthen the case for more outsiders who don’t fit the typical candidate mold.
Simultaneously, Platner is a player in a bitter factional struggle inside the Democratic Party, where he’s aligned with a left socialist faction that is trying to supplant the existing establishment. Many of the stronger opinions about him from national figures, pro and con, come from people on either side of that struggle.
And finally, there’s his messy personal history — Nazi skull tattoo, crude Reddit posts, volatile past relationships, drinking, and sexting other women while married. A fresh round of these reports in recent weeks has heightened Democrats’ fears about his general election chances — and even opened discussion about whether he could still be replaced on the ballot if more damning scandals emerge.
Amid a year where President Donald Trump is very unpopular and a national blue wave is rising, the basic partisan stakes for Senate control could well prove more important than any of these candidate-specific factors.
Yet the intense interest in Platner means his performance could have real ramifications for politics going forward — for Democrats’ factional battle, for what types of candidates get recruited to run, and for which scandals are really disqualifying for office nowadays.
Platner, the left factionalist and outsider populist
The Platner candidacy came about because several leftist operatives and organizers recruited him into the race and are running his campaign. Fans of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and democratic socialism, they want a hard-edged anti-oligarchy class politics, and they view mainstream Democrats as ineffective stuffed-shirt stooges. In recent years, opposition to Israel has risen to the top of their priorities as well.
Over the past decade, this left faction has powered Sanders to two second-place presidential primary campaigns, brought “The Squad” to the House of Representatives, and elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — whose top strategist, Morris Katz, is also Platner’s. They’ve also helped pull the Democratic Party in their direction generally on the issues, including on Israel.
What they haven’t really done is beat a formidable Republican in a high-profile general election — like this one, against five-term Sen. Susan Collins. And these activists’ choice of an inexperienced outsider in Platner cuts against the conventional wisdom of who can win such a race.
Party leaders prefer to nominate credentialed politicians with a proven track record of electoral success. That’s what they’ve done in other key Senate races like North Carolina, Ohio, and Alaska. And that’s what they tried to do in Maine, by actively recruiting two-term Gov. Janet Mills to run — but the race got away from them.
Mills was a 78-year old two-term governor whose popularity had been dropping and who ran a low-energy campaign after waffling for months on whether to run. Platner was nearly four decades younger, an outsider, and promising to take on both parties’ establishments. There were elements of class and gender politics to his perceived appeal, too — there’s been much handwringing in recent years about whether Democrats have lost the ability to connect with the working class and with men generally.
Platner’s campaign caught fire, becoming a viral phenomenon, and he amassed such a polling lead that Mills suspended her campaign in April, making Tuesday’s primary largely a formality.
He clearly struck a chord with Maine Democratic voters, going beyond his core of support among the pro-Bernie base.
“He’s taken stances on the far left of the party, but I think even more important than that has been his persona and the approach,” Mark Brewer, a political scientist at the University of Maine, told me. “He’s anti-establishment, he’s not politics as usual, he’s going to take a sledgehammer to the establishment. I think for a lot of Democrats in Maine and nationwide, that’s the kind of mood they’re in.”
Platner’s messy personal history is spurring some worry about his chances
Yet the latest round of Platner scandal coverage in recent weeks has also called attention to some risks of nominating a little-known outsider — and has spurred some finger-pointing by Democrats at the left activists who, they fear, have risked blowing a very winnable election.
Platner survived the first round of such scandals late last year, about his tattoo — an image of a skull and crossbones used by Nazis — and crude Reddit posts. He claimed he wasn’t aware the tattoo was a Nazi symbol, but admitted having a flawed past and argued that he’d changed after overcoming a dark period of PTSD.
His critics argued that the tattoo should be on its face disqualifying and expressed skepticism that he only discovered its meaning late last year; defenders argued that his lengthy anonymous posting history didn’t include any signs of Nazi sympathies. More broadly, many Platner supporters have argued that the party needs to tolerate messier biographies if they want candidates who can connect with ordinary people.
As Mills’s departure from the race indicated, Democratic primary voters initially seemed inclined to accept Platner’s explanation. But more recent reports again revived debates over his character and electability: The Wall Street Journal reported in May that Platner’s wife had discovered sexually explicit texts with other women on his phone just last year — not exactly the distant past. She has stood by Platner and said they worked through issues in their marriage.
Soon afterward came the New York Times report about what the paper deemed his “unsettling” behavior in certain past relationships — such as sexist comments and, one ex alleged, twisting her arm and trapping her in a room during an argument. (Platner has denied this and said the ex’s allegations are politically motivated; she has worked for conservative political groups.)
Naturally, there are fears among Democrats that something worse might emerge — memories of Eric Swalwell’s swift exit from the California governor primary after several women accused him of sexual misconduct are still fresh.
But so far the allegations against Platner haven’t risen to that level and Platner’s prominent endorsers, like Sanders, have stood by him. (“There are no saints in the United States Senate,” Sanders said Monday, maintaining that Platner had “the guts to take on the big money that is dominating the country.”) And while Mills noted ahead of Tuesday’s election that she was still on the ballot, she declined to officially restart her campaign.
Even if party leaders wanted to force him out, it’s hard to see how they could — he owes nothing to them. Only a collapse of his support among Maine voters could potentially spur that, and limited early polling shows a tightening race but not a decisive turn against him.
If Platner in fact ends up losing this race — and especially if Democrats fail to take the Senate because of it — party leaders will blame left factionalists, and argue they should be permanently discredited. (Just check the X feed of Neera Tanden, a high-level figure in several Democratic administrations, who has lately responded to bad Platner news by pointing fingers at the activists who recruited him into the race.) More generally, primary voters might again grow more skittish about nominating unusual, untested, or controversial candidates in battleground contests.
Conversely, if Platner wins, it will be another triumph for the upstart faction that is trying to reshape the Democratic Party — and another sign that traditionally-credentialed, established Democratic candidates need to watch their backs.
