Graham Platner, the Democratic frontrunner in Maine’s U.S. Senate primary, has spent the better part of two months absorbing one scandal after another. Now, with the primary hours away, a columnist on MS NOW’s (formerly MSNBC's) own opinion page is calling on Democrats to push him out the door.
The piece, written by Michael A. Cohen and published Saturday on MS NOW, concedes what any honest observer already knows: Platner is “a moral and political trainwreck, with enough skeletons in his closet to fill a graveyard.” That is not a conservative hit piece. That is a left-leaning outlet’s own columnist describing the Democrat who is about to win Tuesday’s primary.
What the MS NOW Piece Actually Admits
The column runs through the full scandal file. There is the chest tattoo bearing a Nazi Totenkopf symbol that Platner claims he did not know was a Nazi symbol until the fall of 2025, by which point he was already running for Senate. There are the sexually explicit texts sent to as many as a dozen women after his 2023 marriage, his Kik profile still active when reporters found it. There is the New York Times report on former girlfriends who described volatile relationships, including Lyndsey Fifield, who said Platner “twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn’t get out.”
Add the years of sexist and racist Reddit posts and the exaggerated working-class background, and you have a candidate whose entire biography is under active revision.
Cohen also highlights a detail that cuts directly at Platner’s central defense on the tattoo. Fifield told the Times that Platner had joked to her about his Nazi tattoo, and she produced a screenshot from a group chat dated August 2025 in which she was already discussing the Nazi emblem with friends. Platner has maintained he did not know about the tattoo’s Nazi origins until months after that.
Cohen’s conclusion: Democrats should handle this themselves, before Republicans do it for them.
But that framing deserves more scrutiny than it gets.
The Strategic Argument Is Not the Moral One
To his credit, Cohen does not limit himself to electoral math. He acknowledges the hypocrisy charge directly, noting that Democrats “have long preached the idea of believing women when they claim sexual harassment or violence.” He invokes the Franken precedent. He points to the absurdity of Democrats attacking Republicans for standing by flawed candidates like Ken Paxton while doing the same for Platner.
But Cohen’s driving concern is strategic, not moral. The question he keeps returning to is not whether Platner’s behavior was disqualifying. It is whether Democrats can afford the general election exposure.
“Where will Platner’s numbers be in November after five months of GOP ads hammering him?” Cohen asks.
That is not an argument about holding a standard. It is an argument about who gets to enforce it, and when.
The Democrats Have Already Made Their Choice
Cohen frames this as a decision Democrats still have to make. Most of the party made it weeks ago.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and who helped force Al Franken out of the Senate in 2017, told reporters this week: “We are still going to win Maine.” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, reviewing the latest allegations about Platner’s behavior toward women, said it “seems like a lot of nothing.” Bernie Sanders, whose endorsement helped launch Platner’s campaign, said “I guess not. I don’t know too many saints here," when asked whether the candidate is a saint.
Rep. Ro Khanna called Platner’s behavior “wrong and toxic,” then headlined a rally with him in Bar Harbor anyway.
John Fetterman is one of the few Democrats who has held the line. After the latest Times report, Fetterman told NOTUS that Platner reminded him of Texas ranches: for every one you see, there are 50 you have not. He said Platner had lied about the tattoo and promised there would be no more scandals, and then there were more. Rep. Madeleine Dean called Platner “disqualified.” Rep. Jake Auchincloss said the tattoo alone was “personally disqualifying.”
All of them are Democrats, too. Yet, the party’s campaign arm is still in the race.
What Republicans Are Actually Supposed to Do Here
Cohen implies that Republican engagement with Platner’s record constitutes fighting dirty, that surfacing documented behavior from a U.S. Senate candidate is somehow out of bounds. But the Times and the Wall Street Journal broke these stories. The Reddit posts were public. The tattoo was photographed at a campaign event. None of it required anything beyond a search engine.
Platner himself has signaled how he plans to handle the general election. He told MS NOW he expects Republicans to “fight as dirty as possible” and “drag stuff up consistently.” In other words, he expects accurate reporting about his conduct is dirty fighting while all but admitting there is more out there.
Cohen’s piece is not wrong that Democrats should demand that Platner step aside. But the piece gives the game away with its final line. Heading into November with Platner as their nominee, Cohen writes, “risks Democrats losing both the Maine Senate race and their souls.”
The souls part is in there. But it comes last. The Senate race comes first. That ordering tells you everything about how the party is actually thinking about this. The moral case is real. The strategic case is louder. And so far, the strategic case has not been enough to move them.
Republicans did not create Graham Platner’s record. They are just planning to use it. If Democrats think that is fighting dirty, the problem is not the Republicans.
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy RedState's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member