Winning, Losing, And The Platner Problem

Article text

This week I’m writing an old-fashioned BFT analysis of Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s thoughts and proposals for battling the bad-faith jurists who dominate SCOTUS. Before I publish that blog, I wanted to tell you, the BFT newsletter getter, that I have (very) intentionally avoided writing and talking about Platner because he is rightfully a divisive figure. Let’s put it this way: When I log onto Bluesky and I see folks I like and respect insulting each other in unspeakable ways, when I see online relationships turning to dust with every reply, I know without even looking that the original post was about Graham Platner the oyster knower. And I’m always right. Now that he’s all but clinched the Democratic Party nomination for the U.S. Senate seat in Maine, I feel obliged to touch the scalding Platner stove and offer my view of a candidate you find either inspiring or nauseating, with nothing in between. It starts, as always, with Platner’s nazi tattoo. That’s what it is, or was, I suppose, since he got it covered up with some sort of ink glob. I think it’s best if we are honest about this. We don’t know what Platner did or did not know about the nazi symbol when he got it tattooed to his chest while on military leave. Maybe Platner is ignorant or just kinda dumb. Maybe he’s susceptible to peer pressure. Maybe he knew exactly what the tattoo meant and he – like many young men with politics miles outside the American mainstream – had a dalliance with fascism. The radicalism and anti-establishment ethos of fascism might have seemed to young Graham like a palatable solution to overturning the existing order and making things right for the people. Which people? Well, therein lies the problem. Read more on BadFaithTimes.com .