Few will be surprised if there are new revelations as the general election heats up. Will Democrats stick with him in their eagerness to return the Senate to Democratic control — the best guardrail against 2 more years of chaotic Trumpian policy making. Will independents be willing to vote for him? Will Republicans be energized to come out in droves for Collins? Here’s what our writers had to say.
‘Another kind of morality’
Yes, for Democrats, Graham Platner is a necessary evil to retaking the Senate.
To do it, they must rally behind Platner, his sexting, and alleged troubling treatment of old girlfriends, not to mention his tattoo, with its Nazi origins, and suspect working-man cred. He’s an oyster farmer whose dad went to Dartmouth and the grandson of a famous architect.
In short, they must do what Republicans are doing with Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general who is running for Senate — accept him, flaws and all, and fight for him.
As veteran Democratic strategist James Carville put it, “We got a f—– up guy… could be 100 times more f—— up than he is. He never would be as f—— up as what we got in Washington now anyway.”
Never fearful or ashamed of hypocrisy, Republicans will do all they can to weaponize “morality” in their fight to keep Susan Collins in the Senate. But if morality means to never make a mistake as a human being, I don’t think that definition of morality matters much to voters in Maine or elsewhere.
Those who want an alternative to the current administration are looking for another kind of morality.
Does the dismantling of the promise, if not the reality, of equal rights for all, no matter their race, religion or gender identity, make your stomach churn? When you look at an immigrant who is here illegally do you see a person seeking a better life, or a sub-human who must be torn from home and family and deported?
Do you accept a political system that enriches the rich, and has no money or mercy for the poor and no relief for those in-between? Do you want a Congress that bows to every presidential whim or do you want lawmakers who do their duty as laid out in the Constitution, and stand up to the chief executive?
What is moral for society? That’s what matters in Maine’s Senate election.
Does personal morality — also known as character — matter? Up to a point.
It’s easy to blame its demise as a relevant issue on President Trump and his complete lack of integrity, courage and honesty. And it’s true, the bar set by Trump does sit in negative territory. But voters have always accepted character flaws, maybe because they know their own.
Carville’s most famous client, former President Bill Clinton, dodged questions about infidelity, drug use and draft dodging before he won election, and faced plenty of character issues afterwards.
Early in his political career, in response to questions about his drinking, DUI arrest and assorted rumors about drug use, former President George W. Bush said, “I’d be the first to admit that I did irresponsible things when I was young and irresponsible.”
Bush also criticized the “politics of personal destruction” which have only gotten more destructive.
If Democrats rally behind him, Platner can survive those political attacks and win.
The questions will then be, can he live up to the hype and hope? And will the flaws that were overlooked to elect him ultimately bring him down?
Final question: Would I be one of those voters who rally behind Platner and all his flaws in November, or just sit it out? I’m still not sure. That’s Collins’ not-so-secret weapon.
The party could have done something. It didn’t.
By Noah Rothman
It is hard to imagine an America in which one of its two major parties would outright sacrifice a high office in observance of basic moral probity, as George H.W. Bush did in 1991 in denouncing the GOP’s Louisiana gubernatorial nominee, David Duke.
The Clinton and Trump years have transformed both parties’ ethics. As institutions, they’ve subordinated scruples to the pursuit of power. Voters do, however, sometimes put the demands of partisanship to one side — as Alabama Republicans did when the scandal-plagued Roy Moore lost his bid for US Senate.
Maine’s voters will almost certainly be confronted with a similar moral quandary in November. Graham Platner, the guy with the Nazi tattoo, a habitual liar with a penchant for violent and bigoted talk — a figure who is now credibly accused of harassing and even being physical with the women in his life, before he was “sexting” with at least six potential paramours behind his new wife’s back — will grace top of the Democratic ticket in the Pine Tree State.
Only two days before Platner was accused in the New York Times of manhandling a former love interest and locking her in a room overnight (another accuser’s story was apparently so traumatic she declined to relay her experience to Times reporters), Platner assured the Democratic Senate caucus there would be no new revelations about his sordid past. There would be. And, according to Platner’s former political director, there’s more to come.
The question before Democratic political professionals and party apparatchiks is not whether they should get Platner’s back or abandon him to salvage their brand. Rather, they seem to believe they are hostage to events. As such, the finger-pointing has already begun.
Some formerly Platner-friendly venues are beside themselves over how the vetting process went so wrong. The Philadelphia-based progressive consulting firm First Agency is today’s scapegoat. Its operatives dropped the ball, the Bulwark contends, looking beyond the indiscretions they did uncover because Platner’s radical politics were, they told themselves, just what voters were looking for.
But Mainers are encountering their own Roy Moore moment. In interviews with about two dozen Democrats and independents in the state, Politico reporters found that many “who were planning to vote Democratic in November are now toying” with voting for the Republican incumbent or “sitting out the Senate race entirely.”
Democrats had time to avert this disaster. But the parties are no longer masters of their own destinies. They dare not engage in elementary political hygiene lest they be accused of trampling the people’s sacred will. So, they placidly await their fates and hope for the best.
It wasn’t always like this, and it doesn’t always have to be like this. But until the parties realize that they are vehicles for winning elections, not self-affirmation machines designed only to ratify their base voters’ self-destructive impulses, they’re going to keep putting up Graham Platners. And it will continue to be up to the voters to reject them.
Let’s not live in fantasyland
Graham Platner, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Maine, is no stranger to controversy. Since he launched his campaign, concerning stories about his past have surfaced with troubling regularity, from his unsavory Reddit posts to a Nazi tattoo on his chest (which he has since covered up) to new reports that he exchanged sexually explicit texts with several women while married. The New York Times also interviewed several of his ex-girlfriends who alleged that he was a toxic and at times intimidating boyfriend.
After spending a decade telling voters that Donald Trump is unfit for office in part because of his controversial past, wouldn’t Democrats be hypocrites if they expect voters to now ignore a Democratic candidate’s scandals just because he’s their guy?
The truth is that yes, there is some degree of hypocrisy — but emphasis on some. Even among the scandals the public knows about, Trump’s personal controversies dwarf Platner’s. Trump has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than 20 women. His businesses have committed fraud. He and his father were sued by the Justice Department for discriminating against Black tenants. That’s not to say that Platner’s scandals don’t matter, but they don’t compare to Trump’s.
Even if that weren’t true, politics is filled with hypocrisy. Pretending otherwise is living in fantasyland. At the end of the day, voters never have a choice between a perfect candidate and a deeply flawed one. Voters always have to compromise on some principles, and the choice before them is which candidate will serve the greater good. After all, why would Democrats be bothered at all by Trump’s allegations of sexual misconduct when they supported former President Bill Clinton through all of his controversies?
Now, Democrats are stuck with Platner. If they want a shot at winning back the Senate — or, at the very least, unseating Susan Collins — then they have to rally behind him. That doesn’t mean excusing his past behavior. But it does mean being realistic about whether they would rather have a Democrat representing Maine in the Senate or someone who votes with Trump about 95 percent of the time.
So far, Platner has consistently polled ahead of Collins. He also outperformed his primary opponent, Democratic Governor Janet Mills, against Collins in general polls. At this point, he is Democrats’ best chance.
Of course, it’s a long time between now and November, and who knows what other stories about Platner will come out. That’s a risk that Democrats now have to accept because the alternative — pushing him aside and replacing the nominee at the 11th hour — would fracture the Democratic Party’s base and all but guarantee a loss in November.
For Democratic voters in Maine, the question boils down to this: Would you rather have a senator who acts as a rubber stamp on Trump’s agenda or a senator who will reliably vote against this nightmare of a presidency? Character and personal integrity matter. But the stakes in this election matter more.
This is an excerpt from Globe Opinion’s weekly politics newsletter Right, Left, and Center. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox every Wednesday.
Joan Vennochi is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at joan.vennochi@globe.com. Follow her @joan_vennochi. Noah Rothman is a senior writer at National Review and a regular contributor to Globe Opinion. Abdallah Fayyad can be reached at abdallah.fayyad@globe.com. Follow him @abdallah_fayyad.
