Comment by bayarearefugee
20 hours ago
They have to be kind of panicking that the smear tactics keep backfiring.
Didn't stop Mamdani. Won't stop Platner.
At this point it is amusing to see them pissing away so many millions of dollars to stop a public opinion tide that has no chance of being stopped.
I'm not sure in the Platner case why the supposed progressive cause can't find someone without a Nazi tattoo.
I'm not sure what the alleged benefits of Platner are either. Mamdani has been amazing, but what is Platner for?
It's not like it's a swastika, it was a skull and crossbones that turns out to have been used by the SS (I think?). I had no idea that particular image was nazi-related and I don't think most other people would have either. As far as "mistakes made by marines on shore leave" go it's pretty mild. Honestly his more recent scandals are more concerning as far as character.
Platner's upside is being a senator that's not from the student senate -> Hill staffer -> party insider pipeline. We're all pretty much sick of that character, he sounds much more authentic by comparison.
It's an extremely well known nazi symbol. Probably second behind the swastika itself. There's even that famous "are we the baddies" meme, which uses that symbol as a central pillar of the gag.
14 replies →
I would expect anybody who graduated with a 4 year degree in the US to be able to recognize a totenkopf. It's probably the third most well-known Nazi symbol, and is almost certainly present in any textbook or museum about WWII (besides being a symbol is fictional media about Nazi Germany).
However, I think this is beside the point. The more relevant questions are (1) whether Platner knew what it was, and (2) whether an informed voter should want someone who doesn't know the meaning of the things they get tattooed on their body. Authentic or not, (2) demonstrates a lack of good judgement to me.
(Separately, having been to that part of part of Slavic southern Europe, it is inconceivable that any tattoo parlor that would give you a totenkopf tattoo is not plastered in other Nazi and far-right iconography. You would need to actively look past all of the other Nazi stuff and assume that the skull is the one thing that doesn't have some additional meaning.)
> I had no idea that particular image was nazi-related and I don't think most other people would have either
for context it's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totenkopf#Nazi_Germany , i'm surprised so many people didn't know the nazi use
if platner really didn't know, i guess it just spoke to him as a (future?) blackwater mercenary
> no idea that particular image was nazi-related and I don't think most other people would have either
He knew what it was [1]. That doesn't mean he's unelectable in 2026.
[1] https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/05/politics/graham-platner-cant-...
8 replies →
Plathner is authentic and able to see and correct his mistakes (tattoo), two important properties that candidates from the una-party lack. He is certainly not perfect, but apparently better than the rest.
What is the alleged downside of Platner as a politician?
All I see discussed is tatto which is irrelevant and does not reflect his policy
Just pure hysteria from neurotic people
> what is Platner for?
Not being MAGA. I have some respect for Susan Collins. But this nonsense where a tattoo and infidelity should be disqualifying on one side while the President, popularly elected this time, sleeps with porn stars and endorses anti-Semites and KKK adjacents, is unsustainable. If we need a dude with a Nazi tattoo to win Maine, I guess I prefer to be pissed off and winning.
> Not being MAGA
Yes, but that should be baseline for the Democrat candidate? Are there really no better candidates in Maine? This sort of thing would be regarded as disqualifiing in the UK even for local councilors from the far right. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/27/calls-barns...
2 replies →
I have the fear that Platner will just be another Fetterman, and you will have brought this unto ourselves...
7 replies →
I feel like Maine's about to lie down with dogs over this.
> Won't stop Platner.
That's unfortunate. Choosing a leader who lies constantly and boasts of enjoying killing people seems like an unnecessary mistake. He is attacked by people who have defended far worse and are quite cynical. That doesn't mean he should be defended. He should be attacked by a left comfortable enough in its future vision as to not compromise on basic principles.
The attacks against Mamdani were disingenuous. This suspicion has heightened when the other candidates being artificially propped up had such huge flaws. I hope we can learn to see when that dynamic pops up in other places.
> Choosing a leader who lies constantly and boasts of enjoying killing people seems like an unnecessary mistake.
I hate to break this to you, but you're already rocking multiple of them.