Apparently the accusations of him being Nazi stem from a tattoo he got while on shore leave. Seems like pretty slim evidence. From the article:
Instead, the accusation is entirely based on a skull and crossbones tattoo that Platner got when he was a young Marine on shore leave in Croatia. He and a friend picked the design off the wall of the tattoo parlor. Unfortunately, he chose a Totenkopf, the skull and crossbones configuration used by the Nazi SS. If you do a Google search for “how to tell Totenkopf from other skull and crossbones designs,” you’ll learn that it has a “more articulated lower jaw” and more “defined” teeth than skulls used in other designs. I’m willing to take it on faith that there are people who can tell at a glance which jawline is which, but I am not one of them — and neither, unfortunately, was Platner.
Removed by mod
Wtf? All I said was the Platner had repeatedly referred to his tattoo as his Totenkopf years before publicly acknowledging the nazi tattoo. Why would that be removed, do we hate journalism? https://edition.cnn.com/2025/10/24/politics/graham-platner-nazi-tattoo-evidence-kfile-invs
Nowhere in that article, or the associated links, does Platner call it “his Totenkopf.”
Reading is hard sometimes, I’m sorry you struggled with it:
Jewish Insider first reported about the former acquaintance, who recalled Platner referring to the image as “my Totenkopf” in a joking way more than a decade ago. CNN spoke with that same acquaintance, who reiterated the recollection. Genevieve McDonald, Platner’s former political director, told the Bangor Daily News that she had been aware of the tattoo since at least August and that Platner himself acknowledged it “could be problematic.”
My mistake. Not sure why the word search didn’t find it before. I’ll restore the original comment. I’ll forgive the self-righteous indignation because I can understand why having your memory questioned is frustrating.
You didn’t question my memory, you questioned my honesty, and I took that personally. I appreciate the apology.
eyyyy, hit em with that spreading misinfo and being a psyop BAN. Dude was earlier talking about how people with trauma/PTSD are less capable, unstable and can’t be trusted.
To clarify, the unstable personality could be entirely separate from the ptsd. Ptsd manifests in a variety of ways, but in none of my comments did I say ptsd is the reason why he is unstable. He has gone through massive personality and belief changes, that’s a fact. He has been diagnosed with ptsd, that is also a fact. Both of those should be considered when putting someone in a position of power for 6 years.
The people in Maine don’t seem to care about Platner’s past, and their opinions are the only ones that matter.
Removed by mod
“Opponents”, also known as “people who have thought about his past for more than 5 seconds and realized he could’ve truly had a dramatic personality change within the last year, but even if that is the case, pretty much anybody else is better qualified, and his reaction to people having concerns about his nazi past with nazi tattoos and nazi friends doing some nazi-esque shit in the name of the US military does not inspire confidence in his ability to recognize and respect humanity in all its forms.”
hurray, 6 more years of Collins. That’s what you want, right? Because that’s the reality you’re promoting.
I don’t know what fairyland unicorn candidate you’ve got hidden somewhere, but we have to live in this reality. And in this reality, the choice was between Schumers handpicked corpo geriatric AIPAC Janet Mills, the GOP lapdog Susan Collins, and Platner. Make your pick lefty. Or run yourself. If no one is good enough for you, then go on, go set the example.
You can’t escape the fact that Platner is either:
A. A liar, a mercenary, and a nazi
or
B. A ptsd suffering veteran with an incredibly unstable personality which currently aligns with our political views
I can escape your false dichotomy, and do. I reject your premise on the grounds that not everyone sees things in extremes. You should try it.
It’s not an extreme, the second scenario appears to be the mainstream view among democrats, although with less focus on the potential for an unstable individual to do unexpected things.
the second scenario appears to be the mainstream view among democrats
Why the fuck would “the mainstream view among democrats” be even the slightest bit persuasive? Cite proof or GTFO.
dude… you’re really doubling down on this. So, trauma shaming is fine. You’re saying “hey people with PTSD, you’re unstable and shouldn’t be trusted. Your traumas make you a worse person”. That’s what you’re putting out. You good? Are you good with that message?
What’s a parallel here? You about to tell rape victims that their traumas makes them unreliable judges of character? Does that sound alright to you? Same thought process. Is that the kind of person you are? Someone who shames people for having trauma in their past?
No I reject that completely, leaders need to be held to a higher standard. There are so many ways for him to invest in and volunteer his time to help his community that don’t involve giving him power over others. Mental health issues and/or an unstable personality should absolutely be taken into account for senate candidates, lest we get another Fetterman. Additionally, just framing it him having PTSD is rather disingenuous. Platner was not the victim of a war, he was the openly admitted participant in a black ops wet-work team. He has, under his own volition, admitted to torturing people. If he feels traumatized by that, well, i have a hard time being very sympathetic. Comparing that to a victim of rape is probably not your best work.
They’re okay with a possible nazi if it gets them a win.
Or because he says he wants to address military spending not by lowering it but improving how it’s spent on defense contractors and mercenaries.
So how long until they do a piece called yes they are an out and about nazi running as a dem, but here’s why you need to vote for them to stop trump.
Closer to elections or during the 2028 presidential primaries?
Removed by mod
Huh? What’s with Warren catching strays? She’s been out doing events supporting Platner.
My only real criticism of Warren is that she only seems to pop up as some kind of “activist” during election season. After that, she fucks off and basically toes the partyline. It comes off as very “performative”, very “controlled”.
And she never has a real chance at the presidency, so the most she can do is basically “shame” other candidates. That shit she pulled with Bernie in 2018, trying to shade him as a chauvinist, lying that he said “a woman can’t be the president”, unbelievable.
But perhaps the worst thing she does is create division AFTER primaries. Before primaries, it’s a freeforall, and you absolutely SHOULD be critical of all opponents, party or otherwise. Do your best to cut out the corpos, the fakers, the shitheads… but after the candidate is picked, and the only opponent is the fascist in the GOP, then the time for discussion is over. You need to stfu, unite and face the real enemy. But Warren couldn’t do that… and she continued to sow division and doubt all the way to the general election, playing a crucial part in democrats not turning out to vote and letting Trump win.
Okay, so I have a lot of criticism of Warren. On paper, her polices are very sound and very progressive. But as a person, as a party member, she’s a liability. And so many “Warren voters” followed her with their “protest votes” during the election (not counting the ones who just didn’t bother showing up). And she never apologized for that.
So, I mean… cool, good for her that she’s endorsing Platner now. Her policies are progressive, but she and her supporters are kinda shitheads.
Just because you don’t follow her doesn’t mean she’s not pushing progressive things in off years. She was the first Senator to call Gaza a genocide, voted in the progressive block on all the votes I can remember where there was a progressive vs. moderate split, and is constantly advocating for more progressive positions on things. Which is all any of the progressives do because their actual power as legislators is basically nil and all they have is their voice.
This just seems to be a kind of nonsensical made up version of her. You’re both criticizing her for (supposedly) toeing the party line while also complaining that she sowed division against Harris through the general election (something that’s just entirely made up) and led Warren voters to stay home (which is just wildly out of step with their whole vibe). Is your imaginary version supposed to be a “controlled” party loyalist or a rabble-rouser sabotaging the party nominee?
totally slipped that 2018 Bernie comment there, didn’t ya? Don’t wanna talk about that one, eh? I get it.
You can defend her, and look, I get it, publicly she has good policy. I’m not even anti-Warren, just anti-some-of-the-shit-she’s-pulled. I’d still prefer Warren over Biden, or Hillary, or Kamala. I’d vote for her next election if she had a serious chance of winning and defeating the GOP. But she doesn’t. And when she doesn’t have a chance to win she needs to support, not tear down. She needs to pick and choose her battles, time and place, and prioritize what’s important. And from my perspective, you’re welcome to disagree, she doesn’t do that. She throws dirt on allies and highroads in a way that only shames them instead of building up a unified coalition. She did it to Bernie, she did it to Kamala. When she’s running, she’s primarily concerned with herself. Impending cataclysmic fascist opposition be damned.
I don’t think they were complaining about Warren, so much as they know enough history of gopherking to know that he was pushing Warren over Harris in the last GE.
Is that because you remember gopherking was doing that or because sailor’s response implied it? Because I’ve never even heard of anyone calling for Warren to have been the last nominee. That’d be pretty divorced from reality.
I don’t remember gopherking specifically, but there were some accounts that were saying Warren was a better choice around the general election
