Last September, the progressive strategist Morris Katz confessed to The New Yorker that the process by which he decided Graham Platner was qualified to run for U.S. Senate required less time than drinking a cup of coffee. Actually, it seems to have been less a confession than a boast. “Within a few minutes of talking to him, I was, like, ‘This guy owes it to the country to run for Senate,’” Katz recalled.
In the 10 months that have followed, a procession of unflattering stories have made clear how dreadfully irresponsible it was for Democrats to entrust the task of flipping what seems like the most necessary seat to secure their potential Senate majority to a man who had never run for office or led an organization of any size. The almost-certain final straw is a Politico report that alleges Platner raped a woman named Jenny Racicot in 2021. The story includes messages referring to the incident sent by Racicot two years later, before Platner contemplated running for office. Platner called any allegation of nonconsensual behavior “categorically untrue.”
There is no longer much question as to whether Platner is suitable for public office, and even less question as to whether plucking him from political obscurity made any sense. A more pertinent question is: What could possibly drive a professional political strategist to support such a rapid promotion in mere minutes?
One plausible reason appears to be political ideology. Katz and his allies have sought out candidates who are willing to castigate the Democratic Party for selling out the working class—which necessitates, or at least militates toward, candidates who have no experience inside the party. And whereas this ideological orientation requires an intensity of commitment, it does not require a mastery of policy detail.
[Read: Maine has a Graham Platner problem]
Dan Moraff, one of the strategists who helped select and vet Platner, “wants his candidates to back Medicare for All and characterize the Israel-Hamas conflict as a genocide, but beyond that, doesn’t believe voters care about detailed proposals,” The Wall Street Journal reported last month. Having a policy agenda that could fit comfortably on a Post-it Note without omitting any important details certainly speeds up the process. Platner, indeed, has boiled down nearly all political problems to the perfidy of sinister oligarchs. Whatever the merits of this worldview, it does not demand much knowledge.
But a second, at least as important, reason for Platner’s lightning-fast ratification was that he has the desired look for the part. Donald Trump has described liking his appointees to come right out of “central casting,” by which he means that they look like a Hollywood version of the position they are filling.
Katz and Moraff have taken an almost literal approach to this “central casting” criteria, searching for candidates whom the camera loves and then offering them to an adoring progressive fanbase. Platner’s qualifications in this regard are obvious. He has a masculine baritone, and works with his hands. Last year, Katz filmed a video of his new protégé shucking oysters, chopping wood, swinging kettlebells, and speaking directly to the camera in a muddy sweatshirt about how the oligarchy had screwed their beloved state.
The performance helped make Platner a political star. “I flew here to profile Graham Platner,” wrote Ana Marie Cox in The New Republic last September, “because his announcement video for his Senate campaign (produced by the same company that’s done work for Zohran Mamdani) struck the same deep chord in me as it did in the millions of others who watched it.” A stream of adulatory profiles followed.
It soon emerged that Katz’s abbreviated assessment of Platner had missed, or overlooked, troubling details. He had posted inflammatory messages on Reddit and gotten a tattoo associated with Nazi war criminals. Platner claimed that his past indiscretions were the product of post-traumatic stress, and promised that he was a changed man with no additional skeletons to hide.
More skeletons kept turning up, though. Platner had sexted with at least a half dozen women after he was married, and reportedly lied about what he knew about his tattoo. He assured Senate backers that no additional negative stories would come out, only for his promise to crumble again.
Platner’s enthusiasts initially continued to support his campaign and reject the evidence of his misconduct. When The New York Times reported that a past girlfriend alleged he had physically abused her, the paper dismissed her testimony on account of her being a Republican, ignoring the discrepancies in Platner’s own defense.
[Mike Nelson: The ‘broke veteran’ excuse]
Matt Stoller, a researcher at the left-wing American Economic Liberties Project, wrote on X, “Graham Platner represents a rejection of Dem HR lady politics.” In a follow-up post, Stoller apologized for the impolitic term, but explained that he meant the party had fallen prey to a form of corporate rule that had especially harmed men. Human-resources departments, he wrote, “increasingly were forced to become bagmen for monopolists who hated labor.” Despising these departments, he reasoned, was actually progressive, because they represented the interests of the oligarchy.
At the risk of apologizing for the corporate power structure, one function of the HR department is to ensure the company does not hire somebody whose background contains multiple firing offenses.
In reality, Platner was the Democratic-candidate equivalent of the grinning empty suit who gets the job after a handshake because the boss likes the cut of his jib. He looked like the authentic working-class hero so many progressives wanted, so he had to be one. George Burns once quipped, “When you’re playing a role you’ve got to be honest. And if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.” In politics, people call this “authenticity.” But maybe looking and sounding like a working-class dude who hates big corporations is not adequate qualification for high office—or even proof that you can be taken at your word.
The post With Graham Platner, Democrats Got Drunk on the Beer Test appeared first on The Atlantic.
