How far are Democrats willing to go to support Maine U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner? The situation has unfolded to reveal a troubling picture. Platner has attracted attention for a Nazi tattoo and has made remarks in online forums that raise serious ethical questions. In 2013, he suggested that rape victims should bear some responsibility, and in 2020, he labeled rural Americans as “stupid” and “racist.” His disdain for military sacrifices was evident when he publicly wished death upon U.S. Army Pfc. Ted Daniels, who was shot in action, and even cheered for the Taliban, suggesting a profound lack of respect for those serving the country.
When confronted about his past comments, Platner dismissively stated, “I’m proud that I got through a dark period in my life, and I’m proud of the life that I live now.” Yet this statement prompts critical questions: When did that “dark period” truly end? A recent report shed more light on Platner, suggesting that troubling behaviors persisted. His wife reported that he had sent sexually explicit messages using the app Kik as recently as last year. Is this part of the darkness he claims to have moved beyond?
The New York Times published a story that, while soft-pedaled in its approach, still chose to cover Platner, indicating there are serious concerns that cannot be ignored. The article included insights from several women, including Lyndsey Fifield, who dated Platner. Her credentials as a conservative connected to right-leaning groups seem to invite skepticism about her claims, yet it’s crucial to take her assertions seriously. Fifield claimed that Platner was well aware of the Nazi connotations of his tattoo, as his military unit intentionally selected the design. She recounted a conversation where he indicated his group felt a kinship with the S.S., stating, “They literally, deliberately, selected it because it was relevant to their military unit.”
This contradicts Platner’s narrative that it was merely a cool tattoo he got while on leave. How could Fifield have known about the tattoo if Platner was unaware? It raises the unsettling implication that he was aware all along, yet his party continues to rally behind him despite this revelation.
Fifield also described instances of rough behavior, claiming Platner could be aggressive without crossing the threshold into physical abuse. She reported being grabbed roughly and recalled an incident where he yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument. During another altercation, he reportedly restrained her by holding the bedroom door closed, insisting she “calm down.” While The New York Times referred to this as “unsettling behavior,” many would argue it constitutes an abuse of control.
When pressed about his actions, Platner acknowledged his struggles, attributing them to an alcohol problem. He noted he was “a far from perfect boyfriend during a very dark period.
"*" indicates required fields
