I suppose I have to address the new Graham Platner scandal. Platner is our great hope for defeating Susan Collins in Maine, and until recently he appeared to be cruising to victory. I was so upset when the story broke last night I had to turn off my livestream television feed (as I don’t actually own a tv; I watch on a Kindle). Chris Hayes devoted most of his one-hour program on MS NOW to an interview of Platner, but I couldn’t bring myself to watch it.
The good news, if you can call it that, is that Platner is not accused of rape. Mostly he seems to be a jerk with issues. I agree with Scott Lemieux at Lawyers, Guns and Money, that people should be encouraged to “vote for the scumbag,” anyway. Control of the Senate is too important. It may be that he can overcome this — especially considering he’s running against the party of Donald Trump and Ken Paxton — but let’s hope another shoe doesn’t drop.
I’m sorry to write a short post. I’m having some health issues — nothing serious — that are wearing me out. I’ll try better tomorrow.
Here's a great piece by Oliver Kornetzke on exactly this topic.
https://open.substack.com/pub/oliverkornetzke/p/a-question-for-you?r=a63g&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
It's a discussion of which candidate you would choose, based on their history and circumstances. Very interesting.
I don't have a vote in Maine, but I would much rather have Platner in the Senate than Collins. I feel that way because at this moment in history, I think we need to take drastic measures to try to steer a careening country away from the brink of disaster.
Democrats are going to hand Maine and the Senate back to the Republicans
That's up to the voters in Maine now. Platner was not the candidate the Dem establishment wanted. The Maine primary is this coming Tuesday. There is only one other Dem candidate running, a fellow named David Costello. Platner has been hugely ahead in the polls, and I suspect he will still win the primary.
Maine seems to be down to one choice, make lemonade. Trying to stay healthy and getting healthy is like that too. Just one real choice. It gets priority over all else.
It's both another life delt too many lemons deal.
Well as usual a right wing operative is rolling over the democrats. Platner has some flaws, I've followed the story pretty closely a friend of mine is from Maine and knows him. He had pretty much explained most of the stuff out there, the tattoo (he didn't know what it was, plausible, it wasn't a swaztika, it was a skull and bones), he apologized to his wife and admitted his unfaithfulness in his marriage, certainly more than any right-winger would have done (Trump, Paxton). So everything was out in the open until a week before the primary the NYT ran article quoting a right-wing operative (Lyndsey Fifield) who was Platners girlfriend in the past. Are we really going to go down this road again. Are we going to believe a heritage foundation political hack who comes out with a hit piece sponsored by the NYT a week before the primary? If I lived in Maine I would enthusiastically vote for Platner, the right-wing mud machine assisted by the NYT is coming after him for a reason, they know he is going to win and take the GQP majority and hand it to the democrats. Enough of the hand wringing!
So far people who are speaking up seem to be taking last week’s story as a political gotcha rather than a serious revelation. It’s possible it won’t make that much difference in the general election.
Platner's a Dem and the only viable Dem alternative was the current governor, who is too old to turn out the younger than us generations. Platner is saying the right things as his values and goals. If he wins, I don't think he will be a "Fetterman" or "Sinema"… that commentary is Rep BS.
One thing that truly upsets me about these stories is, they ignore that he had a drinking problem, and PTSD.
To say "well, he must be scum, to have such stories told about him," is extraordinarily ableist. It suggests alcoholism and PTSD are very minor issues; just getting sober, and just treating the PTSD, those things couldn't possibly change him from "asshole" to "good man." Additionally it's arrogance in the extreme to think that if you, the average reader, developed PTSD that drove you to substance abuse, you wouldn't do some damage to some relationships.
Note that I'm not excusing one whit of his behavior; I'm merely saying that, he's not just saying he came to Jesus one day. He's saying he's treated a drinking problem and PTSD, and when you do that, your life is completely altered. A person too angry, too easily triggered, by PTSD, can be terribly unpleasant to be around; add in alcohol, and you've got folks who, without the PTSD, and it's drive towards drink, would have always been fine gentlemen,, who nevertheless act badly. Remove the horror of PTSD and the stupidity of alcohol, and you may have non-scum.
There's a whole lot of people who, to invoke an internet meme, are demonstrating they have no idea, no conception, of what PTSD is, without having to use the word "PTSD" at all! (Technically, the "initialism," and not the "word." Whatever.)
It can be extremely tricky to be in a romantic relationship, if everything is going well. If one partner has PTSD, it's not surprising if things go south, not because PTSD makes a person scum, but because PTSD sufferers don't have the energy to be their best selves. And again, relationships are tricky, even at best. With three exes, I'm not sure how much more relationship timeline there is for more bad news to come out.
I can't say he must be an okay guy; I'm saying the story arc of bad relationships pre-treatment and better man post-treatment is very believable, especially since (as I understand it) he admits he wasn't a decent guy at the time (so he's not making excuses).
Anyway: that's the impression of a brain gimp whose neurological problems mimic PTSD, and knows how hard it is to have a healthy relationship, with such challenges. Please stop, and think; he's not saying PTSD excuses his actions, merely that he's a better man, now that it's no longer dominating his life.