I predict that if Platner beats Collins he will be caucusing with the Democrats during his entire first term. I’d offer 2:1 odds on that.
I predict that if Platner loses in November… well I’m not sure. But if he runs for political office again within the next 4 years, it will be on the Democratic ticket. I could see him flirting with Joe Rogan or the dirtbag left.
If Platner beats Collins I’d expect skepticism from him about Gaza, because that won’t hurt him with his base. But I have no idea what committee assignments he wants. My central baseline is that he will act like most other low to moderate wattage House Reps. Generally Senators have more experience, but not always.
There’s nothing stopping a Maine primary voter from supporting Mills, since her name is still on the ballot. You could slot Platner in at #3. But the anti-fascist position in November will be to oppose Collins.
FWIW, I consider myself to be a supporter of Israel, but not Nentanyahu.
I favor the knucklehead hypothesis (though my off-board characterization is more vulgar). Regarding your fears, if Platner wins in November and the Dems have a majority, I doubt whether the Democratic majority would allow Nazi policies up for a vote. If Platner wins and the GOP maintains its Senate majority, then I admit I won’t be shocked if Fetterman and Platner join them in anti-immigration legislation. But that’s not Nazi stuff. I do suspect that Platner will be part of growing share of the American populace that is more skeptical about Israel.
If Platner is a plant, he might introduce anti-Semitic legislation that is scary but goes nowhere, because that’s not the current style of the GOP. But if find this scenario unlikely, as it would end his Senate career. Neither party likes turncoats. To get an explicit far-right anti-Semitic bigot in Washington, I think you would need some kind of system of proportional representation. .
Yes, if we were talking about a gubernatorial race, I’d vote for Collins in a heartbeat over the Nazi. Governors have a lot of power to act on their own. He’s less likely to cause serious problems as a senator, and might even decide that it helps his paycheck to just vote the party line.
Yes, what we have here is Upton Sinclair in reverse: Platner’s salary and political survival depends upon him refraining from the Nazi. Not that he was especially committed to it to begin with.
Setting aside the 2026 fight for the democratic experiment, Republican governors and mayors are occasionally decent. Republican Washington legislators invariably break the budget, inflate the budget deficit, and hand out tax cuts for plutocrats. It was different during the 1970s. Today, there’s really no justification for sending a Republican to Washington unless you like budget deficits and tax cuts aimed at billionaires.
But the stakes are higher than that. In 2024-2028 the GOP opposes civic democracy and relies almost entirely upon scapegoating immigrants and mass deportations for popular support. The combination of the two equals fascism as I define it. Fascism isn’t a great term to throw around in general, and I try to refrain from using it among normies. But it makes a convenient shorthand here.
Fascism is also bad for business: the behavior of the business elite has been mostly shortsighted and disappointing. Not entirely: it’s a fight.
Pure guess but after reading a number of interviews and profiles of him (notably this one from the NYT that I’ve posted before and no one can be bothered to read) I would wager one of his top committee assignment choices would be the Armed Services Committee.
[quote=“Chronos, post:302, topic:1028179”]
His “liberal message” is all anti “elitist bankers”. Which is standard Nazi code for the Jews. [/quote]
There’s a wealth of town halls and other stuff all over youtube of Graham Platner talking to all sorts of audiences. Here’s a recent 90 minute interview with Jon Stewart: Graham Platner On Service, Messaging & the Future for Democrats | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart. If someone has the time and inclination, please highlight a couple of smoking guns during the interview that he’s a Nazi trojan horse.
I would have to re-listen to be 100% sure it didn’t have “elitist bankers” dog whistles. There is an awful lot about political elites, tech bros, etc grinding down the working class. IIRC he called out Chase and Jamie Dimon (is this ‘elitist banker’ code?).
IMHO, thinking that Graham Platner gets elected and then shows his true rabid nazi colors by becoming a firebrand MAGA jew hating, Trump loving, forever war endorsing, sell out that leads to having to wear the Star of David in the US, is beyond tenuous. YMMV
He loves talking about how we need to take down the evil “billionaires.” Maine has only one billionaire, Susan Alfond. She runs a company that makes bowling shoes that she inherited from her father. She has never donated to any political cause. She is, in fact, Jewish, for whatever that’s worth.
It seems unlikely that Susan Alfond’s shoe factory is the cause of whatever real or perceived problems people in Maine have with their lives. It seems equally unlikely that Graham Platner or the people who write his speeches actually believe that it is. Of course “billionaires” is code for something, the only question is what.
If you listen to any of Grahams stuff, it’s pretty obvious that the Billionaires" are techbros (Musk, Zuckerberg and Theil get called out), private equity, corporate political power, etc.
If you have a list of code words and dog whistles that Graham Parker uses, please share. From what I’ve heard of Graham Platner speaking, “Billionaires” is not some tenuous code for “Jewish Cabal running the world.” Happy to be corrected.
I really should read my posts more carefully before posting as I do have a tendency to make these kinds of mistakes.
On the other hand, if Platner does gets elected and turns into a secret Nazi then maybe I got it right it the first time and we really do need to castrating some people. (I kid, I kid,)
OK, anyone talking about how they don’t think that he’s a secret Nazi, or so on: Can we get just one explanation for the tattoo?
To review the facts: While in the Marines, he got a Nazi tattoo. By his own admission, he had to leave the Marines shortly after that due to their tattoo policy. The Nazi tattoo was the only tattoo he had that violated that policy, and he did not, at that time, choose to remove or cover it. He then continued to wear the tattoo, and show it off, for nearly two decades. When it came up in this campaign, he initially lied about it, until pictures surfaced. Only then did he cover it up. And then, after he covered it up, he said that he regretted covering it.
I can think of one explanation for all of that. I can’t think of two. I can think of other explanations for part of it, but not for all of it.
The Taj Mahal is covered in swastikas. Does that make it a Nazi shrine? No, of course not. Understanding the symbols requires context.
Same too with a skull and crossbones tattoo. Where did the person get it? When? Under what circumstances? And what have they said about it?
Here, there’s context that leans towards “not a Nazi symbol”. From all accounts I can see, it was obtained at a regular tattoo parlor in a foreign country, while serving as an American marine, because he thought it looked cool.
So where’s the rest of the context that makes it actually a Nazi symbol?
Those facts seem to be missing. From my review (and please tell me if I’m mistaken), Platner has given no other clear indications that he has Nazi sympathies.
Instead, all we seem to be getting is hyperbole. Somebody posted upthread that he “wants to kill all the Jews” (because that’s what the symbol means). By that logic, the iconography on the Taj Mahal means that Indians are all planning on mass extermination.
Must we then assume that Bernie Sanders is also a Nazi? Railing against “billionaires” is kinda his schtick.
There are no cites for this. He left the Marines because his enlistment was up. He later rejoined the military. I defy anybody to find a cite that says otherwise.
You were doing fine up until here because, and this is so obvious that I’m surprised that it even has to be explained, the Taj Mahal was constructed prior to the Nazis and that symbol has a different use in its culture. It’s honestly an incredibly offensive comparison. Do better.
I’m well aware of how the Nazis co-opted a positive symbol for their regime.
That’s my point.
As horrific as the Nazis were, and as much as they loved their symbolism, if someone said “if I see somebody with a Swastika I don’t need to talk to them or learn more, They’re a Nazi, and I already know all I need to know.” then they could be wildly mistaken.
Even seemingly obvious iconography requires context.
So too with this guy and his skull and crossbones.
Casual recreational Nazi coding is so contrary to the ethos…
And ok let’s see, last time I checked: “bankers” and “Hollywood” = Jews. “Billionaires” = tech broligarchs and Big Healthcare.
With major overlap in “private equity” which seems to be an equal opportunity realm.