Yes, Graham Platner is a Trans Ally. Yes, He Says What You Want to Hear. That Doesn’t Make Him Any Less Unfit for Office.

Despite his ostensibly progressive politics and vocal LGBTQ+ allyship, Graham Platner was unfit for office long before the latest allegations. Why did it take so long to finally draw the line?

Image: Graham Platner’s campaign website

I remember when, almost a year ago, Graham Platner first announced that he was running for Senate. I saw it everywhere: a populist oyster farmer & veteran was taking on Maine Governor Janet Mills and the rest of the ‘Democratic establishment’ in a must-win 2026 Senate race. Like everyone else, I was interested; after all, Susan Collins has been a remarkably stubborn incumbent, and in other states, bringing in a political outsider has worked before. His politics quickly won him the endorsement of the Democratic Party’s progressive kingmakers: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Ro Khanna, David Hogg, and others all threw their weight behind Platner.

Then the problems began. In October, reports surfaced that he had made loads of bigoted Reddit comments in the past, including one that victim-blamed women who have faced sexual violence.

But he’s changed, right?

Then came scrutiny over the Totenkopf—a Nazi symbol—he had tattooed on his chest. He claimed he did not know of its significance when he got it and had it covered up.

But he’s changed, right?

Then came the report a few days later that he had previously called his tattoo ‘my Totenkopf,’ clearly undercutting the excuse he’d given.

But he’s changed, right?

By this point, I was no longer buying into the Platner hype. Although I agreed with his politics and hoped that he had indeed changed, I knew that, especially in this race against Collins, he’d be a liability. But he pressed on. His supporters pressed on. His lead in the polls only grew.

I could see why: outside of controversies, he was saying all the right things. He was highly vocal in his support for the LGBTQ+ community and especially vulnerable trans kids. He opposed Trump’s weaponization of ICE. He supported Ukraine. He opposed AIPAC and labeled Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide. He called US billionaires ‘oligarchs.’ And he championed labor unions.

Then in February, he went on a conspiracy theorist’s podcast and said he was a ‘longtime fan.’

But he’s changed, right?

In May, it was reported that he’d cheated on his wife and sexted with multiple women.

But he’s changed, right?

Then, last month, he was accused of domestic violence and was alleged to have repeatedly told a former girlfriend that he fantasized about having a person break into his home so he could rape them “to show them that [he’s] dominant.”

At the time, I called him a bad person and said he was unfit to serve. Many others did as well. But he pressed on. His supporters pressed on. A few days later, he overwhelmingly won the Democratic primary despite his string of controversies. The Democratic establishment united behind him, and the matchup was set.

Because he’s changed, right?

Then, just yesterday, he was accused of raping a woman in 2021. Like clockwork, his progressive backers like Bernie, Warren, Khanna, and Hogg rescinded their endorsements and called on him to drop out of the race. As did Zohran Mamdani, Chuck Schumer, Ruben Gallego, Tim Walz, and nearly every PAC that initially endorsed him. According to reports, he’s now considering suspending his campaign. And I agree: Graham Platner must go, especially while there is still time to replace him.

But it needs to be asked: why now? How is it that the line has only been drawn here? It implies that everything else he’s done—a history of bigoted comments, a Nazi tattoo, adultery, domestic violence, and fantasies of rape—somehow isn’t disqualifying. Because except for maybe the first one, all of these things are. And these are all things that I, along with most left-leaning Americans, will readily criticize Republicans over. Don’t believe me?

We say that former North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson’s insane porn forum comments are disqualifying. We say that former Missouri Rep. Todd Akin’s 2012 ‘legitimate rape’ comments are an example of unacceptable victim-blaming and disqualifying. We say that Elon Musk’s Nazi salute—and subsequent denial—during Trump’s second inauguration is unforgivable and disqualifying.

We also say that Trump’s affair with Stormy Daniels—and subsequent cover-up—is disqualifying. We say that Ken Paxton’s divorce on “biblical grounds” is hypocritical and disqualifying. And we say that Herschel Walker’s accusations of domestic violence are horrific and disqualifying.

These things aren’t just disqualifying when a Republican does them; whether or not they are disqualifying transcends politics. National stakes be damned. ‘Relatable persona’ be damned. Progressivism be damned. And if Republicans don’t choose to hold their own to those standards, then that’s on them. It makes their appeals to character less effective and allows Democrats to attack GOP candidates on their disqualifying characteristics. That is not a position that the American left should be willing to lose. Especially not over someone like Platner.

Within the LGBTQ+ community, Delaware Representative Sarah McBride has received sporadic criticism for saying that advocates need to “create space for some imperfect allies.” In her words, this means recognizing that “if we are gonna have 50 percent plus one in support of basic nondiscrimination protections, if we’re going to have 50 percent plus one in support of protecting access to medically necessary care, that, by definition, will have to include some people in the 70 percent who oppose trans people participating in sports” and meeting them where they’re at.

Although McBride’s comments were said in the context of trans rights, they can be applied to all issues. After all, those within a given coalition almost certainly won’t agree on everything because politics is complicated by nature, but where they agree is more important than where they don’t. Through my work, I’ve gotten to speak with imperfect allies like Nebraska State Sen. Merv Riepe, a Republican who supported banning trans people from sports but has since single-handedly blocked every attack on trans people in his state. I got the sense that he’s a good person who’s trying to do the right thing, and I have a great deal of respect for him.

Graham Platner is a different kind of imperfect ally. He’s the kind of ally who says exactly what I want to hear: he vehemently opposes any attacks on the trans community even when it’s not the most popular position. But, based on everything I’ve seen, it’s clear to me that he isn’t fit for public office. There are simply no standards that he holds himself to. How can we be so sure his ‘perfect’ positions won’t change once he’s elected?

Because of that, I’d rather vote for someone like Merv than someone like Graham. I may not particularly enjoy being governed by people I disagree with, but I’m sick and tired of being governed by bad people with no morals who use their positions to hurt others.

And I’m willing to bet I’m not the only one.