Graham Platner’s campaign in Maine’s 2026 Senate race has caused divided opinions among many of the state’s progressive and left wing voters, partly due to revelations around his former military contractor work, comments he made online in the past, and especially due to a totenkopf tattoo he received while serving in the Marines overseas. The tattoo is a design that was historically used by the Nazi SS, and has become a popular symbol with white supremacist circles. Platner has since had the tattoo removed and claims he did not know about the hateful history behind the design when we got it in the early 2000’s. However, it has left a good number of progressives and leftists struggling with whether they can support him or not, while he presents himself as a left populist fighting for a pro-working class platform.
Two contributors holding different opinions on the candidate, Rose DuBois and T. Sinclair, have agreed to share their conversation on the candidate’s acceptability and viability. Below is a transcript of their back-and-forth.
***
T. Sinclair
Before we get started, I want to clarify that in no way am I excusing Platner’s tattoo. It was a dumb thing to get when he was young and in the Marines, and a disgusting symbol of hatred. And, whether you believe him when he says he didn’t know what it represented when he got it, I think it’s important to consider that people grow and worldviews can change. Graham has shown in the last five years or so that he has evolved to genuinely hold progressive, working class values that support all people, no matter race, gender, or orientation; not just with his words, but also through his community work with Action Acadia. The Democratic field has a handful of declared candidates, but most agree that the nomination comes down to Platner or current Governor, Janet Mills. Given Mills’ centrist (and sometimes conservative) record on labor, criminal justice reform, and indigenous rights, coupled with her lower than average approval rating, I think Graham Platner is a win-win candidate with not only the best chances of beating Susan Collins in November, but also delivering on a true working class agenda. But I am interested in hearing your thoughts, Rose.
Rose DuBois
Up front I want to start by dismissing the various other “scandals” that have plagued Platner. There’s a lot of, I would argue, fairly bad faith criticisms of him that just don’t resonate with me, or with I think most Maine voters. Even the Reddit comments, while they did bother me, I also know how people talk online, and as you said, people can change. I found his apology video for the comments to be quite persuasive. Nor am I in favor of Janet Mills. I was incredibly excited when I found out someone was going to be challenging her for the nomination, and was a big supporter of Platner from day one. But having a Nazi tattoo—regardless of any context—should be a red line.
I’m willing to entertain his claim that he didn’t know what it was when he got it—fair enough, people do stupid shit. And if it had come out that he’d gotten one, but had it removed years ago, I’d maybe see it in a different light. But the idea that he didn’t know what it was until now, twenty years later, is completely ridiculous. We should absolutely extend grace to those who strive for redemption, but redemption requires remorse about one’s actions. Denial is the exact opposite, an attempt to escape responsibility.
But ultimately the specifics of shortcomings of a single person are less interesting to me than the wider context in which this is occurring. Even beyond the fascistic politics of Trump and MAGA, an open embrace of Nazism is becoming more widespread in our society. Admiration of Hitler, and belief in conspiracy theories and Holocaust denial are increasingly common aspects of right wing politics, particularly among young Republicans. By electing someone to congress with a Nazi tattoo, we are helping normalize this, something that is extremely dangerous. How can we, for example, attack Elon Musk for doing a Nazi salute, and paint his claim it was another gesture as an obvious lie, when we ourselves engage in the exact same practice of obfuscation for what is very clearly a Nazi symbol? It only serves to muddy the waters, and make it easier to get away with this sort of thing.
And while attempts to depict any support for Palestine as being inherently antisemitic are preposterous, it’s unfortunately the case that antisemitism is also a growing problem on the left as well. What will it mean when the most pro-Palestinian member of the Senate (which I believe Platner would be) is also someone with a tattoo of the unit that was responsible to administering the death camps. It doesn’t take a political genius to see how this will get used by pro-Israeli figures and organizations in our politics.
T. Sinclair
I see where you’re coming from, and I completely understand the concern with a member of Congress who formerly had a Nazi symbol tattoo (he has since covered it up) serving as a representative of the left, and how AIPAC would use that in ad campaigns. There is no doubt antisemitism is on the rise; people on the left who rightly call out the state of Israel’s genocide in Gaza and apartheid policies have made clear time and time again that their criticisms are of a nation-state, not Judaism or Jewish people, but even in some far reaches of the left (and pretty blatantly on the right) antisemitism has crept in and must be combatted. I don’t think Platner is in those far reaches of the left though, and rather stands firmly with 99% of progressives and leftists who abhor all racism and ethnic hatred.
While I take him at face value that he didn’t know it was a Nazi tattoo (his wife and her family are Jewish and he claims they never raised concerns about it, and he passed federal screenings for gang/hate tattoos), let’s assume for a second that he at least had an inkling. I can see that causing voters to take a great pause and really inspect his politics. When you do that, what you find is a man who had mental health trauma from multiple tours in active war zones, came home and sought treatment for it, realized how messed up it is that working families can’t afford basic healthcare (or housing, or childcare, etc.), saw that the system was deeply flawed and got involved with local community organizing for progressive causes.
Facing the given situation, MAGA and Trump 2.0, which is kidnapping people off our streets to extra-judicially deport, initiating illegal violence overseas, attacking the rights of our LGBTQ neighbors, flagrantly bypassing Congress and taking over agencies like the Federal Reserve, FTC, FCC, and FBI to favor Trump’s personal interests, it is not only paramount but existential to elect people to federal office who stand ready to oppose this right-wing “soft coup.” We have a chance here to kick out the conservative Sen. Susan Collins and replace her with a progressive. In my opinion, the good that Platner offers outweighs his bad misdeeds, like getting a terrible tattoo with his Marine buddies 20 years ago. To be honest with you, his choice to join the Marines during the Iraq War, or his short stint with a private military contractor should be bigger issues; but, most voters are fine with that. Is your issue the message that electing him would send, because of his tattoo, or is there reason to believe he wouldn’t be a good advocate for positive change?
Rose DuBois
I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the idea that Platner himself isn’t at least adjacent to the sort of online spaces that are helping conspiratorial thinking proliferate. His Twitter account recently agreeingly quote tweeted the neo-Nazi Stew Peters (before quickly deleting), and in January he did an interview with Nate Cornacchia, a YouTuber who has spread antisemitic conspiracies (as well as racist anti-Somali ones that led to the ICE surge first in Minneapolis and then in Maine), with Platner saying he is a long time fan. Now sure, we can probably come up with explanations for these sorts of things—it’s pretty much impossible to open Twitter and not see the posts of far right users for example. But it’s one thing if it’s a one off event, it’s another entirely when there’s a growing pattern. I would find the defenses of him far more credible if he did not keep dabbling with the promoters of these kinds of conspiracies. If he’s so serious about affirming his anti-fascist commitments to us, why does this keep happening? At minimum it shows poor judgement and a bit of a cavalier attitude towards bigotry.
There’s been a concentrated effort to paint any concern about the tattoo as being “establishment,” or similar, and I find this to be quite insidious. The fact that the response is to become quite defensive is itself a red flag. People should be outraged that he had it! I mean in many countries having such a tattoo is a crime, and one that can incur jail time, it’s no light thing we can just walk past. If the circumstances were remotely any different, everyone on the left would be crying for a cordon sanitaire against him, but because it’s “our guy” suddenly it’s no big deal to have a Nazi tattoo. The way it’s being downplayed is incredibly discomforting.
I also think everyone is overbaking the idea that this won’t have any negative impacts on his electability. What happens come November when every Republican PAC puts millions behind “Graham Platner is a Nazi” ads? Collins is able to win primarily because she overperforms in Southern Maine, largely in the Portland suburbs and the Midcoast—places that used to be more Republican leaning decades ago. I’m not totally convinced that such hits are going to do zero damage among these kinds of split ticket voters.
I am glad that Platner has been able to move on from the dark place he was in after returning from the Middle East, and that he’s been able to channel that into becoming a community organizer. But that doesn’t mean he needs to be a senator. There are 1.4 million people in Maine, many of whom hold similar progressive values, and I would bet that basically none of them have Nazi tattoos. He’s not somehow singularly equipped for the job. I mean a year ago nobody had heard of him! His entire public profile was conjured up by out of state political consultants last summer! It almost feels like an inversion of the “not me, us” framing of the Bernie years, where somehow only this one man can lead our movement and save us, and the movement is treated as nothing without him.
I think if he actually cared about opposing fascism he would have dropped out. There’s no reason why, if he genuinely espouses the values he claims to hold, he couldn’t continue to fight for them as an organizer locally. I would not have become as skeptical of him as I am if he had done the honorable thing and stepped aside. We could’ve gotten behind someone else.
T. Sinclair
The more we chat, the more I think I’m understanding where we basically disagree, which I’ll get to in a second. While you have doubts about his electability vs. Collins, I would point to the most recent poll out of UNH that has him up by 38 points over Mills in the Democratic primary. While I agree with you that it would be a tight race against Collins, he clearly has the best shot for Democrats from a polling perspective come November. Admit it, if it’s Mills v. Collins, Collins wins by a mile.
As for his interview with Nate Cornacchia, we both know Platner’s team has made it a priority to reach out to all voters, including those who voted for Trump out of frustration and attempt to bring them over to a working class agenda that isn’t hateful. When one is trying their best to reach audiences that don’t often hear a progressive populist message, one necessarily has to utilize some conservative media platforms. That’s just the name of the game, ugly as it is. Though, I wouldn’t be surprised if his team might end up looking back on some of those decisions and feel sheepish about them.
So, finally, my thoughts on what I see as our basic difference. You are putting your principles first, believing the tattoo is disqualifying due to the symbol’s terrible past (and him keeping it for so long), his campaign team’s bad media platforming, plus a few other times when he made discomforting online comments. You interpret these as red lines based on your principles, so you cannot support him. I respect that. This is my position: pragmatic strategy should come first. We have to take back power. I have written on my belief in revolutionary forgiveness before, and I am more willing to forgive past decisions of candidates if they show that they’ve grown and matured, which I believe Platner has. I also believe in the importance of progressive working class representatives winning office (especially in this time of existential political crisis).
In my opinion, Platner clearly offers the most pro-working families agenda; one that is pro-LGBTQ, pro-labor, pro-choice, anti-racist, anti-fascist, and anti-war. Plus, he is the most electable. So, in that regard, you could say I am prioritizing pragmatism. And I hear you on the concern that he doesn’t have that same “mass movement” feel Bernie offered, but I would also like to point out how well attended his series of town hall meetings have been, how Bernie endorses him, and that maybe sometimes it just takes an unexpected spark to light a larger fire. Maybe he was hand-picked by some labor-friendly political head hunters, I don’t know, and I honestly don’t care. What I care about is replacing Collins with someone who represents working and marginalized folks’ rights and needs in the halls of power.
As you go into your final thoughts, those are basically mine. This is where we are, and as politically-minded people we ought to look at the terrain and tools we have in front of us, not wish for ones that don’t exist. And, to be honest, I think Platner’s platform is about as good as we could have hoped for in this given time. There’s no changing horses now, even if we wanted to. Unless you think the unpopular Mills or some other dark horse is the way to go. But for me, Platner gives us the best shot at claiming a Senate seat with a truly progressive, working class person, blemishes and all. I really appreciated this chat though, it let me think through a lot and I look forward to your final thoughts.
Rose DuBois
I absolutely would not make a judgement call on an election based on a single poll from one pollster three months before the primary, and eight before the general (though I do tend to agree that Platner is ahead in the primary). Polls aren’t definitive, they’re snapshots, and how voters are feeling can and do change over the course of a campaign. In Texas’s Democratic primary, much of the early polling showed Crockett well ahead of Talarico, a trend that did not continue closer to election day (or ultimately the results). The UNH poll also has some questionable methodology, and other polls also show both a much closer primary and general.
I’d grant that it’s fair to conclude that were the election to be held right now, like this minute, before any real campaigning (on which millions and millions of dollars will be spent), Platner likely has an edge over Mills in terms of beating Collins. But there’s no certainty that that will be the case come November, and I do not think that the maximum damage the Republican campaign machine can do to a candidate like Platner has necessarily been priced into polling yet. I also have zero trust that there aren’t more skeletons in the closet.
I would push back on the idea that were Mills to be the nominee, she is fated to lose. I’ve been fairly bullish on Collins going down this Fall since election day 2024, regardless of who we put against her. We certainly want to ensure that we have the best candidate for the job, but I’m skeptical that taking her down is going to come from a magic trick of a candidate, and more so the basic fundamentals of how Maine’s electorate is changing, the difference in environment between 2020 and 2026, and the profound unpopularity of the current administration in a midterm year. Even when I was excited about Platner I felt that way! The point in my mind was never to find a perfect candidate, but to get the best possible senator. Now that’s certainly not to say I think Mills would be a good nominee, or a good senator—I do not. She has become quite unpopular, she is far too old, and her politics are not remotely suited for the political moment. I’m not arguing for Mills, I’m arguing against Platner.
Responding to your point about the interview, I want to contrast it with the hubbub years ago when Bernie appeared on Joe Rogan. That feels quite different to me, and it was fine for him to do, as you said, in the interest of contesting voters. But the huge glaring difference is that Bernie did not have a giant Nazi tattoo on his chest. Sure, you can make a mistake and apologize for it, but words are cheap, and if you go back and continue to make the same mistake again, you’re making it pretty clear how sincere you are. Since the revelation of the tattoo, he’s done nothing to disabuse us of the notion that he’s still mixed up in circles where antisemitism and right wing conspiracies are common. And if he’s going to be influenced by that sort of thinking, I absolutely do not want him in any position of political power period.
I’d also like to point out that contrary to what the narrative is, Platner’s base very much is not the working class that exists outside of the progressive bubble. It’s more or less the exact same coalition we’re seeing from insurgent candidates elsewhere across the “democratic tea party” moment—combining the classic Bernie base of young and well educated downwardly mobile professionals with middle class suburbanites. Mills does notably better in polling in CD2 and Northern Maine than Platner does, and Platner’s strongest income bracket by far are people making over $100k. And I would be remiss not to point out how incredibly gendered this whole thing is as well.
Which ultimately brings me to your concluding point about principals vs pragmatism, to which I could not disagree with more forcefully. You’re framing this as a blemish that can be looked past in the name of the policies he might support, a bump in the road you feel comfortable ignoring while I do not, completely missing that my central objection to him is that the normalization of Nazism has very real consequences. Yes, I certainly hold anti-fascist principles, and these principles do guide my thinking, but these aren’t coming from abstractions, but a quite concrete and deadly serious reality.
Nazism is an ideology of death and its continued growth in our society puts me under direct threat. The Nazis persecuted and murdered trans people in the camps, and you can absolutely bet that the current crop of groypers and neo-Nazis that increasingly make up the lower echelons of the Republican Party, given power, would do the same again. Twenty years ago, even having a hint of Nazi connection would end your political career, but the norms around this have become much thinner, and they are breaking. Every little thing that chips away at them makes Nazism a more acceptable part of our political life, and you can be certain that electing someone with an SS tattoo to congress is taking a huge sledgehammer at these norms. Whether intentional or not, it makes it easier for the sort of hatred to spread unabated that puts marginalized people in harm’s way.
What’s in Platner’s heart, whether he’s an anti-fascist or an antisemite, a progressive populist or a secret Nazi, is ultimately immaterial to the problem here. What policies he would or would not support are equally irrelevant to my perspective on him. It’s that his election in and of itself is a danger because of the tattoo, and one many people are brushing past and taking far too lightly.
***
We would like to thank our contributors, T. Sinclair and Rose DuBois for agreeing to partake in such an important conversation. Pine & Roses will continue its coverage of the Maine 2026 races throughout the year.
