The Democratic Senate nominee in Maine, Graham Platner, has suspended his campaign, marking a sudden end to
his once-promising bid for the U.S. Senate. Platner had been garnering a tremendous amount of national attention in
Maine for a campaign that, until it crumbled under the weight of recent rape allegations, was drawing big, populist
crowds and had seemingly united the Bernie Sanders wing of the party with the, albeit reluctantly, establishment
wing of the party.
But now Democrats in Maine find themselves scrambling to find a replacement before the deadline later this
month. It puts in jeopardy any chance the Democrats had of flipping the Senate in the mid-terms. Almost any road
that got the Democrats to the necessary 51 seats had to go through Maine. If the Democrats come up short on their
bid to flip the Senate, no doubt they will be left asking what happened in Maine. Was it a flawed candidate who
somehow got by the vetting process? Perhaps that is true. But why were Democrats, both those who are elected as
well as members of the liberal pundit class, so quick, obviously too quick, to jump on the Platner bandwagon? Could
it be because he actually took a stand on the issues and was unafraid to express his opinion, unlike far too many
Democratic candidates in recent cycles?
Democrats are currently suffering from an identity crisis. Even after many of Platner’s issues became public,
including a Nazi tattoo and potential infidelity, because he seemingly represented something that the Democratic
Party sorely needs: authenticity. Too often recently Democratic candidates have felt more like the product of a focus
group trying to anticipate what voters want to hear rather than taking principled stands. At the end of the day, you
have to run on something. And by and large, the Democrats have lacked a coherent message on what exactly they’re
running on this mid-term cycle. What is their plan for immigration reform? What will they do about the cost of
housing? How can we fund the public education system? What is their plan for dealing with the large, societal shifts
that AI is promising to bring? The answer to all of these questions cannot be, “Well, we’re not the party of Donald
Trump.” People want change, they want vision, they want a plan.
Platner, for all his faults, of which there are seemingly many, represented the opposite approach from the
mainstream party. Echoing the message that has resonated with voters in recent elections and won for the
Republicans, he voiced anger about an economy that seems to benefit only the wealthy, leaving behind many. He
was unafraid to voice his opinions on the issues and was willing to run with a message of economic populism.
The result of the Democratic Party being unwilling to take these stands, or any position for that matter, is that only
70% of self-identified Democrats currently view the party positively. When we expand that to include all voters, less
than 40% of voters view the party favorably. That’s a bad way to win elections. By trying to be all things to all
people, they are actually putting themselves in a worse position than if they actually staked out a position on the
issues, even if that position is divisive. Earlier this summer, I wrote about the embarrassing post-election report put
out by the DNC. That yet was another sign of the current troubles that the Democrats find themselves in. Unable to
be honest with themselves about what went wrong and unwilling to have tough conversations between the wings of
the party, which sometimes seem like they fight each other harder than they fight Republicans, the Democrats are
facing the real possibility of squandering an opportunity this mid-term cycle. Opposition parties almost always do
well in mid-terms, especially when the president’s approval rating is low, as is the case currently, but unless they can
figure out what they stand for and how to communicate that to voters, they could come up short this November.
The Democrats will pick someone else to replace Platner, and maybe even win the Maine seat, but they should ask
themselves why they were so quick to back such a problematic candidate. If Platner didn’t seem like such an
exception to the slate of Democratic candidates, then maybe there wouldn’t have been such a rush to back him
before all of his baggage came out. Voters responded to a candidate with a message and that’s where the Democrats
need to focus, what is their message this cycle? They better figure it out because fall is approaching fast.