Good article with great suggestions. I think Plater is a really smart, well read guy who has come to some interesting conclusions regarding political power and is a man who I think will stand for the working class.
I think alcohol contributed to most of the bad decisions he made including his treatment of some of the women he dated, one admitting that the worst treatment happened when they were BOTH drinking.
Your suggestions are on target. Platner has lived a life immersed in the world of “hard men.” To recognize the free labor of women, and the erosion of rights that are necessary for women to live their own dreams would be a step in the right direction.
Heaven be praised, finally à Platner supporter who recognizes the seriousness of the situation- instead of insisting it is all a plot fabricated by AIPAC.
I would add that this is not a matter of ideology, feminist or otherwise. How many women voters in Maine carry personal scars inflicted by toxic, drunken, cheating asshole exes? How can they be asked to vote for another one?
So far Platners wife actually was better at addressing this issue than he ànd his campaign. Seriously, maybe she should run instead of him.
Just spitballing here, but most of Platner's supporters in Maine are sticking with him, even with these latest developments. Could some of this be from women that have previously been in toxic relationships and are willing to support the seemingly only man that has acknowledged and taken ownership for the a**hole ways he's treated them?
Good column but unfortunately your suggestions don’t really matter because it is not who Platner is. He is a fraud whose current persona was created by his operatives. Simply trying additional changes to his persona is just another fraudulent persona and not the real Platner. We need to get a better candidate.
The quote from Cheyenne Hunt (in footnote 4) is interesting. Standing by Platner could also be described as doing what's right even when it's politically inconvenient. How does keeping Collins in the Senate not sacrifice women to the next election?
I'm in Maine and have reached out to the Platner campaign more than once to advise them to focus more on policies that impact women beyond his core economic message. Graham said directly to me that the policies he's forwarding affect everyone. And I said, "That's true. Issues that affect everyone also affect women. But the opposite it not true. There are issues that affect women that do not affect everyone." He needed to have more of a focus on women-specific issues like reproductive health and violence even before the texts were revealed, and now he needs it more than ever.
This is absolutely what Mr Platner needs to read! His abhorrent past treatment of women is difficult for most of us to dismiss. We need to hear more from him before tomorrow!
What’s missing from this redemption strategy? Only the actual disqualifying stuff.
You’ll hear a lot about Graham Platner “owning” that he was “a bad boyfriend.” You won’t hear much about the rest of the record:
The Reddit posts sneering about why Black people “don’t tip,” and the larger pattern of treating Black people as a punchline rather than as constituents.
The attacks on the military and Purple Heart recipients that somehow never quite make it into the “redemption arc” narrative.
The rape‑shaming commentary that puts the burden on women — don’t get drunk, don’t put yourself in that position — instead of on men not to assault them.
Funny how all of that gets quietly routed around when it’s time to write the “he’s grown, he’s learned, he’s listening to women now” pieces. The bad boyfriend stuff is safe. The misogyny, the race stuff, the contempt for people who serve, and the rape‑shaming all get laundered into a vague “he used to be problematic” haze.
So go ahead: defend him, organize for him, vote for him if you like. That’s your call. But if you do all that and still want to lecture anyone else about morality — about women, about minorities, about “decency,” about Trump and MAGA and the “party of values” — you don’t get to keep your morality card. You turned it in the moment you decided this guy was good enough for power, and everything after that is just partisan branding.
I’d rather have universal healthcare and no more Middle Eastern Wars than another neoliberal Boomer that supports genocide. Platner could run over a baby with his car and STILL be less repugnant than anyone with an “R” next to their name!
Funny how that “choice” assumes two things: that a region that’s been at war for 1,300 years is about to suddenly calm down, and that universal healthcare arrives easy peasy once we back the right guy. Reality tends not to cooperate with slogans.
That’s wonderful. Nothing bad has ever happened when people hand complete moral autonomy to a political party. History is just one long, happy story about blind loyalty working out great for everyone.
I agree with your broader point but am not sure anything is gained by presenting him with an itemized list of every a**hole thing he's done in his life and require him to specifically respond to each accusation / event.
But I also agree with Amy that Platner needs to do more than he's been doing so far.
If anyone (in or out of Maine) thinks this is the end of the story, they're sincerely delusional. Susan Collins, the Republican Party, and the unlimited dark-money from anonymous billionaires (thanks, Citizens United), will be throwing show much dirt at Graham Platner that the events we're currently digesting will seen like a spring day in the park.
I have no doubt that there were many men of fine character in the history of the US. (Women also, but only in the past 50 years or so, due to societal discrimination.)
It's interesting that we're using the word "character" here.
Most of the time when we refer to the character of someone, we're referring to their inner moral bearings. But many politicians these days aren't much different from Hollywood actors portraying characters on the screen. They're playing a character that will be appealing to the voting public while keeping much of their unappealing true character hidden in the shadows.
Some, like Ken Paxton in Texas, make no efforts to hide their true character, believing that who they truly are will appeal to a larger share of voters than a softer (or more inspirational) image would.
So, in that sense, you are correct. I wouldn't go as far as saying that character no longer means anything at all in politics, but it's nowhere near as powerful of a factor as it may have been in the past.
Yes! We’ve got a big runway of common ground here. So let me ask you this: when a Political Party like the current Democrat Party, tells their voters that “character matters,” that the other side is “not who we are,” and has spent years building its whole brand spine around that moral contrast… what happens when Platner is offered up as the solution and then defended through every new revelation?
At that point, if a loyal Democratic voter or supporter looks at this record and stays fully on board, is it still primarily about “character” and “values”? Or is it more honest to say the main motivator has become hatred of the other side, and the moral language is just along for the ride?
It’s a magic trick, voters! Suzan plays a moderate on TV when her vote doesn’t matter, but she’s a certified ultra right-wing rubber stamp when it does. The anxiety is fake, the hand-wringing is a script, but the judges and the tax cuts she passed? Those are very, very real."
I think the media needs to confront its own corruption in making up this story. Platner does not need advice from a journalist advancing fake news. Despite all the efforts of the corrupt media, Mainers saw right through this scandal- the scandal is not Platner; the scandal is the media picking up from a political dirt-digging campaign. While the mainstream media sinks to new lows, Mainers are exposed to the news the corrupt media does not cover- Platner's Town Halls, where we are exposed to the real Platner, not the one invented by corrupt media. Despite the coordinated effort od a shameless media, Platner won the primary by a landslide- because he is a good man. Stop trying to escalate unverified gossip into a major political scandal and do some work on yourself instead.
So it’s “believe women” when they’re talking about their experiences with folks you don’t like but not when you like the guy? That doesn’t work for me, not when there are multiple women on record. Also this doesn’t disqualify Platner as far as I’m concerned! I’m asking him to learn more and to widen his platform and understanding of power.
No. It's don't believe women who founded a group to smear a sexual assault victim.
Your point about how GP could strengthen his campaign by talking about abuse/other women's issues is well taken, but I agree with the last commenter that it's muddied by repeating info from compromised news sources. NYT said Fifield was a past republican operative; they didn't mention she was a current IWF fellow who had just been quoted at one of their conferences a month ago.
More damning, they didn't note Fifield co-founded Ladies Against Kavanaugh to counter the "baseless, 11th-hour accusations" by Christine Blasey Ford, nor that Fifield worked for IWF during the time period IWF actively supported Collins' vote for Kavanaugh. Nor that Fifield describes herself as an active Zionist since college (who we're meant to believe spent 3 years with someone who told her they had a Nazi tattoo?). She's also been revealed to be the "anonymous source" cited by Jewish Insider 6 months earlier re: the tattoo. I don't care, but some people do, and will still say "multiple people" claimed he told them this, when in fact it was just one person.
At best, a huge ethical and journalistic omission by the NYT - especially in light of the fact that without Fifield's statement, there simply is no story, and they give her account about 80% of the article. Yes, I agree with you the comments from other gf are concerning on a personal level re: things like a drunk ex showing up at someone's house and told to leave etc., but Fifield clearly made the story, and they left her pertinent history out on purpose. I wish people wouldn't cite this compromised article as a real news source. Hope you will tweak your Footnote 1 accordingly for accuracy.
Platner is not a mysoginist. What Platner must confront is the massive disinformation and character assination campaign being lodged against him and he seems to be winning on that score by ignoring it for the most part and carrying on with his Town Halls despite the disengenuois national media that is making the faux character assasination into a major story and not even reporting on the Town Halls-But Mainers get the Town Halls and are not fooled by the national media and we are the ones who have the vote. BTW,other woman report that he was not abusive but caring and considerate but the corrupt establishment media also underplays this story in favor of escalating a major character assasination campaign. I have lost my respect for formerly respected main stream media because of this.
The last poll had him just two points ahead of Collins, which is a precarious position and I cannot imagine why any progressive would oppose him embracing a broad feminist, women’s rights agenda. It’s the right thing to do and it would help him win. Being defensive and blaming others is not only a bad look, but it’s also politically counterproductive.
No, that is not the issue- but- why believe anyone on such arbitrary terms, and why choose to arbitrarily believe the former girlfriends who say negative things about Platner and use that as a measure of his character rather than the former girlfriends who describe him as caring and considerate? The issue is the intentional narrative switch engineered by professional dirt diggers, who, all things considered, did not come up with anything much on Platner except that he talks the way most people talk when under stress- and that’s a healthy thing. People need to be able to express their frustrations- but that’s not the real issue. The real issue is Platner burst on the scene with a powerful, fresh, and relevant political message, and that needed to be handled by the establishment- both parties and the entire mainstream media united against Platner’s message! But when it came to the vote, it was Platner’s message that won by a landslide! That is how powerful Platner is as a fresh voice that serves as a leader of a genuine people’s movement. That is why the narrative had to be “managed,” but it didn’t work- and yet the establishment and the media continue to push that narrative on us- for lack of a genuine response to Platner’s political message.
I agree with you 100% on most of this but wanted to point out that Platner has been making strides in taking up women's issues. The first rally I went to, in April, before the sexting scandal, Platner hardly spoke. Instead, he gave his platform, his bully pulpit, to three women who were promoting various causes: the nurses's strike was one; and Valli Geiger, who was working to get LD 2129 passed, the Sexual Assault Forensic Exam Act, was another. (I had not realized Maine is one of only two states without a so-called rape kit law; the other is Missouri.) So his actions have been matching his rhetoric, at least in this instance. I (and I assume many of the other 1000 people in attendance) went home and made calls about LD 2129, and in fact it did pass the Maine House.
You offer sound advice, Amy, but I think it ignores the deeper problem here. It’s about character. No matter what advice he takes, no matter what platitudes he utters, he can’t hide his lack of character.
This is a man with no experience whatsoever for the job he is asking us to elect him for. None. Given that he has had no track record of success in any part of his life, we have to examine his character. And the more we look, the more disturbing his character appears to be.
The past 10 years should have highlighted for all of us just how important character is in politics. Far from being the face of a new kind of politics, Platner embodies a left-wing version of Trump politics: tell us what we want to hear, give us an easy enemy to hate, belittle critics, attack the media, and abdicate responsibility.
We have four excellent Democratic candidates running for governor. Any one of them would be a much better choice for the Senate.
Amy, I'm wondering what the response was to your post about replacing Graham Platner with Troy Jackson through a State Democratic Convention? I loved it, partly because I'd thought of it too, although not with the depth and detail you have in your piece. It sounds as though you might have gotten a message from high that it was DOA. That would be very disappointing.
Does Graham Platner's redemption include honest answers to the following questions? My answers come from reporting by the Maine Beacon.
Q. How did you buy your house?
A. I received $200,000 from my father to help finance my house. I did not get help from the VA.
Q. How many customers does your oyster farm have?
A. I sell all my oysters to my mother's high end restaurant called Ironbound.
Q. Did you grow up in a hardscrabble situation?
A. I was raised in an upper middle class household. I went to an elite prep school that cost $75,000 a year. My grandfather was a world class architect who made $20,000 chairs. I have a lot of empathy for hardscrabble folks, but I was not one myself.
My point is that Platner represents himself as authentic, but makes comments about his background that can only be called lies. He has no integrity. If he becomes my senator, I will not be able to trust anything he says and I will be waiting to see if any ethics related problems come out of his office. I am very angry to be put in this position by a Democratic Party I have worked for over 60 years.
Thanks for your kind words. I haven’t heard from anyone “on high” about the replacement option. At this point that seems exceedingly unlikely it would happen.
I’m now curious what % of the vote Platner will get altogether. The last primary poll (UNH) had him at 76%. Also I’m wondering how many unenrolled voters cast ballots in the race. It’s the first open primary.
Amy, I am not voting for Platner and I know of two other people who are not. One may not vote at all and the other is voting for Janet, as am I. I’m so glad I found your site. It wasn’t easy to find and I hope it becomes better known, as I think your commentary is a great help in understanding the dilemma we are in right now. I can’t understand why so many people are voting for Platner. It’s almost cult like.
I think most of his backers stick with him, but have four friends, male and female, who say they won't vote for Platner in the primary but will vs Collins. All of them have heard him speak and three were Platner backers until relatively recently. Another friend doesn't want to vote for him in the fall. So there is an undercurrent not seen if one only interviews people in strong Platner areas and at Platner rallies. But I have no idea how big a portion it is. I hope you'll share this and any other posts you especially like. I try to add to the conversation and not just say something lots of others are saying. Thanks again.
Good article with great suggestions. I think Plater is a really smart, well read guy who has come to some interesting conclusions regarding political power and is a man who I think will stand for the working class.
I think alcohol contributed to most of the bad decisions he made including his treatment of some of the women he dated, one admitting that the worst treatment happened when they were BOTH drinking.
Your suggestions are on target. Platner has lived a life immersed in the world of “hard men.” To recognize the free labor of women, and the erosion of rights that are necessary for women to live their own dreams would be a step in the right direction.
agree about the alcohol which is why it is disappointing that he still drinks.
Heaven be praised, finally à Platner supporter who recognizes the seriousness of the situation- instead of insisting it is all a plot fabricated by AIPAC.
I would add that this is not a matter of ideology, feminist or otherwise. How many women voters in Maine carry personal scars inflicted by toxic, drunken, cheating asshole exes? How can they be asked to vote for another one?
So far Platners wife actually was better at addressing this issue than he ànd his campaign. Seriously, maybe she should run instead of him.
Thanks! I'll also note that caring for the working class should mean recognizing that half are women.
This is the issue that very much affects women of every class . IMHO it shouldn’t be reduced to à form of class struggle, especially by men.
Just spitballing here, but most of Platner's supporters in Maine are sticking with him, even with these latest developments. Could some of this be from women that have previously been in toxic relationships and are willing to support the seemingly only man that has acknowledged and taken ownership for the a**hole ways he's treated them?
Good column but unfortunately your suggestions don’t really matter because it is not who Platner is. He is a fraud whose current persona was created by his operatives. Simply trying additional changes to his persona is just another fraudulent persona and not the real Platner. We need to get a better candidate.
The quote from Cheyenne Hunt (in footnote 4) is interesting. Standing by Platner could also be described as doing what's right even when it's politically inconvenient. How does keeping Collins in the Senate not sacrifice women to the next election?
I'm in Maine and have reached out to the Platner campaign more than once to advise them to focus more on policies that impact women beyond his core economic message. Graham said directly to me that the policies he's forwarding affect everyone. And I said, "That's true. Issues that affect everyone also affect women. But the opposite it not true. There are issues that affect women that do not affect everyone." He needed to have more of a focus on women-specific issues like reproductive health and violence even before the texts were revealed, and now he needs it more than ever.
100%. Thanks for communicating that message on women's issues to the campaign.
This is absolutely what Mr Platner needs to read! His abhorrent past treatment of women is difficult for most of us to dismiss. We need to hear more from him before tomorrow!
Great article and good advice.
What’s missing from this redemption strategy? Only the actual disqualifying stuff.
You’ll hear a lot about Graham Platner “owning” that he was “a bad boyfriend.” You won’t hear much about the rest of the record:
The Reddit posts sneering about why Black people “don’t tip,” and the larger pattern of treating Black people as a punchline rather than as constituents.
The attacks on the military and Purple Heart recipients that somehow never quite make it into the “redemption arc” narrative.
The rape‑shaming commentary that puts the burden on women — don’t get drunk, don’t put yourself in that position — instead of on men not to assault them.
Funny how all of that gets quietly routed around when it’s time to write the “he’s grown, he’s learned, he’s listening to women now” pieces. The bad boyfriend stuff is safe. The misogyny, the race stuff, the contempt for people who serve, and the rape‑shaming all get laundered into a vague “he used to be problematic” haze.
So go ahead: defend him, organize for him, vote for him if you like. That’s your call. But if you do all that and still want to lecture anyone else about morality — about women, about minorities, about “decency,” about Trump and MAGA and the “party of values” — you don’t get to keep your morality card. You turned it in the moment you decided this guy was good enough for power, and everything after that is just partisan branding.
I’d rather have universal healthcare and no more Middle Eastern Wars than another neoliberal Boomer that supports genocide. Platner could run over a baby with his car and STILL be less repugnant than anyone with an “R” next to their name!
I see that as a false choice. My piece is not anti-Platner. I’m offering concrete suggestions to make him a better candidate and senator.
Funny how that “choice” assumes two things: that a region that’s been at war for 1,300 years is about to suddenly calm down, and that universal healthcare arrives easy peasy once we back the right guy. Reality tends not to cooperate with slogans.
That’s wonderful. Nothing bad has ever happened when people hand complete moral autonomy to a political party. History is just one long, happy story about blind loyalty working out great for everyone.
I agree with your broader point but am not sure anything is gained by presenting him with an itemized list of every a**hole thing he's done in his life and require him to specifically respond to each accusation / event.
But I also agree with Amy that Platner needs to do more than he's been doing so far.
If anyone (in or out of Maine) thinks this is the end of the story, they're sincerely delusional. Susan Collins, the Republican Party, and the unlimited dark-money from anonymous billionaires (thanks, Citizens United), will be throwing show much dirt at Graham Platner that the events we're currently digesting will seen like a spring day in the park.
The sooner Platner addresses this, the better.
Fair enough. But you agree, then, that we can dispense with the notion that character actually matters in politics anymore, right?
That all depends on how you define "character".
I have no doubt that there were many men of fine character in the history of the US. (Women also, but only in the past 50 years or so, due to societal discrimination.)
It's interesting that we're using the word "character" here.
Most of the time when we refer to the character of someone, we're referring to their inner moral bearings. But many politicians these days aren't much different from Hollywood actors portraying characters on the screen. They're playing a character that will be appealing to the voting public while keeping much of their unappealing true character hidden in the shadows.
Some, like Ken Paxton in Texas, make no efforts to hide their true character, believing that who they truly are will appeal to a larger share of voters than a softer (or more inspirational) image would.
So, in that sense, you are correct. I wouldn't go as far as saying that character no longer means anything at all in politics, but it's nowhere near as powerful of a factor as it may have been in the past.
Yes! We’ve got a big runway of common ground here. So let me ask you this: when a Political Party like the current Democrat Party, tells their voters that “character matters,” that the other side is “not who we are,” and has spent years building its whole brand spine around that moral contrast… what happens when Platner is offered up as the solution and then defended through every new revelation?
At that point, if a loyal Democratic voter or supporter looks at this record and stays fully on board, is it still primarily about “character” and “values”? Or is it more honest to say the main motivator has become hatred of the other side, and the moral language is just along for the ride?
Graham Platner for Senate
He seems to have gone with embrace misogyny.
It’s a magic trick, voters! Suzan plays a moderate on TV when her vote doesn’t matter, but she’s a certified ultra right-wing rubber stamp when it does. The anxiety is fake, the hand-wringing is a script, but the judges and the tax cuts she passed? Those are very, very real."
I think the media needs to confront its own corruption in making up this story. Platner does not need advice from a journalist advancing fake news. Despite all the efforts of the corrupt media, Mainers saw right through this scandal- the scandal is not Platner; the scandal is the media picking up from a political dirt-digging campaign. While the mainstream media sinks to new lows, Mainers are exposed to the news the corrupt media does not cover- Platner's Town Halls, where we are exposed to the real Platner, not the one invented by corrupt media. Despite the coordinated effort od a shameless media, Platner won the primary by a landslide- because he is a good man. Stop trying to escalate unverified gossip into a major political scandal and do some work on yourself instead.
So it’s “believe women” when they’re talking about their experiences with folks you don’t like but not when you like the guy? That doesn’t work for me, not when there are multiple women on record. Also this doesn’t disqualify Platner as far as I’m concerned! I’m asking him to learn more and to widen his platform and understanding of power.
No. It's don't believe women who founded a group to smear a sexual assault victim.
Your point about how GP could strengthen his campaign by talking about abuse/other women's issues is well taken, but I agree with the last commenter that it's muddied by repeating info from compromised news sources. NYT said Fifield was a past republican operative; they didn't mention she was a current IWF fellow who had just been quoted at one of their conferences a month ago.
More damning, they didn't note Fifield co-founded Ladies Against Kavanaugh to counter the "baseless, 11th-hour accusations" by Christine Blasey Ford, nor that Fifield worked for IWF during the time period IWF actively supported Collins' vote for Kavanaugh. Nor that Fifield describes herself as an active Zionist since college (who we're meant to believe spent 3 years with someone who told her they had a Nazi tattoo?). She's also been revealed to be the "anonymous source" cited by Jewish Insider 6 months earlier re: the tattoo. I don't care, but some people do, and will still say "multiple people" claimed he told them this, when in fact it was just one person.
At best, a huge ethical and journalistic omission by the NYT - especially in light of the fact that without Fifield's statement, there simply is no story, and they give her account about 80% of the article. Yes, I agree with you the comments from other gf are concerning on a personal level re: things like a drunk ex showing up at someone's house and told to leave etc., but Fifield clearly made the story, and they left her pertinent history out on purpose. I wish people wouldn't cite this compromised article as a real news source. Hope you will tweak your Footnote 1 accordingly for accuracy.
She's not the only woman with stories of Platner being abusive and she gave the NYT a diary entry from ten years ago which supports her story.
Platner is not a mysoginist. What Platner must confront is the massive disinformation and character assination campaign being lodged against him and he seems to be winning on that score by ignoring it for the most part and carrying on with his Town Halls despite the disengenuois national media that is making the faux character assasination into a major story and not even reporting on the Town Halls-But Mainers get the Town Halls and are not fooled by the national media and we are the ones who have the vote. BTW,other woman report that he was not abusive but caring and considerate but the corrupt establishment media also underplays this story in favor of escalating a major character assasination campaign. I have lost my respect for formerly respected main stream media because of this.
The last poll had him just two points ahead of Collins, which is a precarious position and I cannot imagine why any progressive would oppose him embracing a broad feminist, women’s rights agenda. It’s the right thing to do and it would help him win. Being defensive and blaming others is not only a bad look, but it’s also politically counterproductive.
No, that is not the issue- but- why believe anyone on such arbitrary terms, and why choose to arbitrarily believe the former girlfriends who say negative things about Platner and use that as a measure of his character rather than the former girlfriends who describe him as caring and considerate? The issue is the intentional narrative switch engineered by professional dirt diggers, who, all things considered, did not come up with anything much on Platner except that he talks the way most people talk when under stress- and that’s a healthy thing. People need to be able to express their frustrations- but that’s not the real issue. The real issue is Platner burst on the scene with a powerful, fresh, and relevant political message, and that needed to be handled by the establishment- both parties and the entire mainstream media united against Platner’s message! But when it came to the vote, it was Platner’s message that won by a landslide! That is how powerful Platner is as a fresh voice that serves as a leader of a genuine people’s movement. That is why the narrative had to be “managed,” but it didn’t work- and yet the establishment and the media continue to push that narrative on us- for lack of a genuine response to Platner’s political message.
I've acknowledged Platner's strengths repeatedly. We should also ask him to be better on women's issues. That will help him beat Collins.
Sure hope Platner reads this and understands it. If not, sure hope someone around him reads it, understands it and has a conversation with him.
I agree with you 100% on most of this but wanted to point out that Platner has been making strides in taking up women's issues. The first rally I went to, in April, before the sexting scandal, Platner hardly spoke. Instead, he gave his platform, his bully pulpit, to three women who were promoting various causes: the nurses's strike was one; and Valli Geiger, who was working to get LD 2129 passed, the Sexual Assault Forensic Exam Act, was another. (I had not realized Maine is one of only two states without a so-called rape kit law; the other is Missouri.) So his actions have been matching his rhetoric, at least in this instance. I (and I assume many of the other 1000 people in attendance) went home and made calls about LD 2129, and in fact it did pass the Maine House.
You offer sound advice, Amy, but I think it ignores the deeper problem here. It’s about character. No matter what advice he takes, no matter what platitudes he utters, he can’t hide his lack of character.
This is a man with no experience whatsoever for the job he is asking us to elect him for. None. Given that he has had no track record of success in any part of his life, we have to examine his character. And the more we look, the more disturbing his character appears to be.
The past 10 years should have highlighted for all of us just how important character is in politics. Far from being the face of a new kind of politics, Platner embodies a left-wing version of Trump politics: tell us what we want to hear, give us an easy enemy to hate, belittle critics, attack the media, and abdicate responsibility.
We have four excellent Democratic candidates running for governor. Any one of them would be a much better choice for the Senate.
Amy, I'm wondering what the response was to your post about replacing Graham Platner with Troy Jackson through a State Democratic Convention? I loved it, partly because I'd thought of it too, although not with the depth and detail you have in your piece. It sounds as though you might have gotten a message from high that it was DOA. That would be very disappointing.
Does Graham Platner's redemption include honest answers to the following questions? My answers come from reporting by the Maine Beacon.
Q. How did you buy your house?
A. I received $200,000 from my father to help finance my house. I did not get help from the VA.
Q. How many customers does your oyster farm have?
A. I sell all my oysters to my mother's high end restaurant called Ironbound.
Q. Did you grow up in a hardscrabble situation?
A. I was raised in an upper middle class household. I went to an elite prep school that cost $75,000 a year. My grandfather was a world class architect who made $20,000 chairs. I have a lot of empathy for hardscrabble folks, but I was not one myself.
My point is that Platner represents himself as authentic, but makes comments about his background that can only be called lies. He has no integrity. If he becomes my senator, I will not be able to trust anything he says and I will be waiting to see if any ethics related problems come out of his office. I am very angry to be put in this position by a Democratic Party I have worked for over 60 years.
Thanks for your kind words. I haven’t heard from anyone “on high” about the replacement option. At this point that seems exceedingly unlikely it would happen.
I’m now curious what % of the vote Platner will get altogether. The last primary poll (UNH) had him at 76%. Also I’m wondering how many unenrolled voters cast ballots in the race. It’s the first open primary.
Amy, I am not voting for Platner and I know of two other people who are not. One may not vote at all and the other is voting for Janet, as am I. I’m so glad I found your site. It wasn’t easy to find and I hope it becomes better known, as I think your commentary is a great help in understanding the dilemma we are in right now. I can’t understand why so many people are voting for Platner. It’s almost cult like.
I think most of his backers stick with him, but have four friends, male and female, who say they won't vote for Platner in the primary but will vs Collins. All of them have heard him speak and three were Platner backers until relatively recently. Another friend doesn't want to vote for him in the fall. So there is an undercurrent not seen if one only interviews people in strong Platner areas and at Platner rallies. But I have no idea how big a portion it is. I hope you'll share this and any other posts you especially like. I try to add to the conversation and not just say something lots of others are saying. Thanks again.