Platner's polling is worrying for Democrats heading into the midterms. What did they expect?

Maine Democrats may have convinced themselves that Graham Platner’s scandals were survivable. 

The general electorate may not agree.

For weeks, the progressive theory of the race was simple enough: Platner was a different kind of Democrat. A Marine veteran. An oyster farmer. A gravel-voiced, anti-establishment populist willing to take on billionaires, Washington insiders and corporate power. He was supposed to be the rare left-wing candidate who could speak to working-class voters in rural America without sounding like he had been assembled in a faculty lounge.

That was the story.

The polling is starting to tell a different one.

Two recent surveys of the Maine Senate race show Platner in a dead heat with Republican Sen. Susan Collins. One poll has Platner narrowly ahead. Another has Collins narrowly ahead. That is not a disaster by itself. Maine is competitive. Collins has survived tough races before. No Democrat was ever going to sleepwalk into this seat.

But the internals are what should worry Democrats.

Platner is running as a working-class populist, yet he is badly underperforming with voters without a college degree. That is not a minor problem for his campaign. It cuts against the whole premise of his candidacy. If the tattooed oyster farmer cannot win working-class voters, then what exactly was the point of nominating him?

The answer may be uncomfortable: biography is not enough when voters doubt the man behind it.

Platner has faced a string of controversies, including a Nazi-linked tattoo, old online comments, allegations about his treatment of women and questions about how authentic his working-class image really is. His supporters have tried to treat each story as old news, opposition research or the cost of nominating an unconventional candidate. But voters do not have to parse every allegation to reach a broader conclusion. They can simply decide there is too much smoke.

The tattoo is especially damaging, and Democrats should stop pretending otherwise.

A candidate for the United States Senate having to explain a Nazi-linked tattoo is not a routine campaign problem. It is not a messaging hiccup. It is not the kind of youthful indiscretion that can be waved away with a few lines about growth and trauma. For many voters, especially Jewish voters, it is a bright red line.

That does not mean Platner is a Nazi. It does mean Democrats nominated a candidate who has forced them into the position of explaining why a Nazi-linked symbol on his body should not disqualify him from one of the most powerful offices in the country.

That is a terrible place to be.

It is also politically self-defeating. Democrats have spent years arguing that antisemitism, extremism and threats to democratic norms must be taken seriously. They cannot then ask voters to look past a Nazi-linked tattoo because the candidate supports Medicare for All and talks tough about billionaires. Voters notice the double standard. So do Republicans. So do independents.

The polling suggests the damage may be showing up belatedly. Scandals do not always sink a candidate immediately. Often they seep into the race slowly. Activists dismiss them. Partisans rationalize them. Friendly commentators insist the candidate is still compelling. Then the general-election electorate starts paying attention, and the candidate begins to lag behind the party.

That appears to be Platner’s risk.

Maine voters may be open to electing a Democrat. They may be tired of Collins. They may dislike Donald Trump. But that does not mean they are willing to gamble on Platner. A generic Democrat might be running ahead. Platner is fighting to keep the race tied.

That is candidate drag.

Progressives wanted Platner to prove that left-populism could reconnect Democrats with working-class voters. Instead, he may be proving that working-class aesthetics are not the same thing as working-class trust. A beard, a boat and a populist stump speech do not erase doubts about judgment. They certainly do not erase doubts about character.

Maine Democrats made a bet. They bet that voters would care more about Collins’s record than Platner’s baggage. They bet that rural town halls could overcome ugly headlines. They bet that the anti-establishment mood would be stronger than concerns about a deeply flawed messenger.

Maybe that bet still pays off. The race is close enough for Platner to win. Collins is vulnerable, and Democrats have real reasons to be hopeful in Maine.

But if Democrats lose this seat, the postmortem will be brutal. They will not simply ask whether Platner was attacked unfairly. They will ask why the party looked at all the warning signs and decided to proceed anyway.

Sometimes voters reject a candidate because they disagree with his policies.

Sometimes they reject him because they do not trust his story.

And sometimes a Nazi-linked tattoo is not a distraction from the campaign.

It is the campaign.

(Contributing writer, Brooke Bell)