Hello, friends,

So, for the most part, I usually stay out of primary races in areas I’m not in some way affiliated with, right? And it’s not like I use The Progressive Cafe for much these days, it’s kind of one of those ‘What really is there for me to add?’ situations. Like, I spoke up about Eric Swalwell because of how sick the accusations against him were, but otherwise? I pretty much stayed out of California’s race. I’ve stayed out of a whole lot of other primaries, too - although I’ll always speak up for my district (currently NY-03) where Danielle Welch is primaring Tom Suozzi because Suozzi is a Republican in disguise. I’ve hardly said much even about my hometown, Freeport NY, because Freeport is a different district than my current home of Mineola, even though they’re nearby.

And, so, other than the not-entirely-infrequent “This guy really sucks” that I’ve put out about Graham Platner’s ever-increasing mountain of bullshit, I’ve pretty much stayed out of trying to hassle people about voting for him. The fact that I’m an outsider, plus the fact that there’s not much for me to say that hasn’t already been said, meant there just wasn’t a cause for me to write an article about it. Gripe about him on social media? Sure! But what really would there be for me to say?

Well, that changed today with a New York Times article (gift link) highlighting that - among other things - this guy has a history of (allegedly) assaulting his romantic partners.

Now, it’s not “What is there that I can say?”, but rather it’s, “If I don’t say anything, I’m not doing my best to prevent a catastrophe, even if only like 10 people are gonna read this.”

Hey, segue. - did you know you can subscribe to get The Progressive Cafe e-mailed?

So it’s been a while, but I remember I first heard about his Reddit comments, reported on at least as far back as October 2025 and, okay, sure, maybe in a stretch you could say you’re down for people who have had a redemption arc in their lives. Maybe not start them off in the U.S. Senate, but redemption should be open to all, right? So I was like, “Okay, this really sucks and I wish there was someone else, but this guy says he’s changed, so let’s see what else happens.”

I then heard about his fucking Totenkoph and was like, “Nah, that’s it, what the fuck are we even doing here?” I called it out on social media, and to a lot of peoples’ credit I saw a lot of people I’d describe as “Progressive” or “more left-leaning than me” calling it out, too. I’d honestly show you my Bluesky posts about it, but their search tools suck and I can’t find an old post. He explained this away as a sort of “I didn’t know it was a Nazi Tattoo and I’m gonna get it removed” deallyo, but I was done.

But somehow - fucking inexplicably - those scandals didn’t sink his chances, and I haven’t even covered all his scandals.

Maybe it’s that Platner has a tremendous raft of endorsements: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, at least five other Congresspeople, a bunch of unions. There are some people who call themselves, or are called “Progressive” who will hitch their wagon to anything Bernie. Bernie certainly has a place in history and he’s accomplished a lot in his own way - in fact, I was just recently talking very positively about his Fight Oligarchy tour through the lens of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s efforts to do that in a more substantial way. Anyway, none of those big names decided to retreat from Platner months ago, so why would the voters?

But many - so, so very disappointingly many - have asked, “What’s the alternative?”

There is some light at the end of this section’s tunnel, so read on.

Maybe it’s that his leading opposition was Governor Janet Mills, an embodiment of everything wrong with the Democratic Party’s institutionalist approach to things. She’s so old as to be well past the age she should have retired, she’s conservative in a lot of ways (against ending the drug war, against ending the Filibuster, very pro-gun, very pro sports-betting), yet progressive in others (pro-LGBTQ+, pro abortion, pro environment), and - perhaps most notably - she was Chuck Schumer’s handpicked candidate at a time when Chuck Schumer, himself, needs to fucking retire (Tomorrow is good, please, you fucking coward?). Anyway, Mills dropped out (“suspended her campaign”) because she didn’t have enough money to keep winning (and wasn’t making any traction in the polls). She’s still technically on the ballot, but hasn’t been campaigning and the election is - oh, let’s see here - this coming fucking Tuesday, June 9th!

Oh but we’ll get to that.

Maybe it’s the fact that the only other opposition to Platner was a scattered constellation of a bunch of names that has since narrowed down significantly. Of those many who ran, only one made it on the ballot - David Costello. Costello is a veteran with a decades-long civil service career (at a time when institutionalism is sort of frowned upon), but who says he will “Offer Medicare, including dental and vision, to all” on his website. Hmm! He wants to raise the minimum wage, he wants to reform voting rights? Wow, golly gee! You think maybe there is another Progressive candidate Progressives could vote for!?

Then there’s Andrea LaFlamme, who I know next to nothing about other than the fact that I just learned that Maine has Ranked Choice Voting in its primaries from her! I knew they had them in generals, so I guess that makes sense. She’s outspokenly for Medicare For All, wants to implement a Green New Deal (which I really need to do an article about), and is outspoken about the Israeli genocide in Palestine! AND THE BEST PART!! If you write her in, but make Costello your second choice and Mills your third, you’re still getting your say even if her write-in campaign falls flat.

Now, I’m not endorsing LaFlamme here, I’m just saying you can write her in without risking not getting a real say against Platner. I’m not saying you should vote for Mills. I’m not saying you should vote for Costello. I’m not endorsing any of them, and what would it matter - I’m not from Maine, so it’s cheap talk from me.

I am anti-endorsing Platner, however, and you’d better fucking believe I question anyone who calls themselves Progressive who supports him just as much as I question those who think it’s strictly Progressives who do.

So my social media bubble de jure is the imperfect-but-pleasant-enough Bluesky. As you might imagine, all of this news has been bickered over time and time and time again. I mentioned earlier that most of the left-leaning people I know disavowed Costello months ago. This includes a whole bunch of professional lefty journalists and social media influencers and all of that jazz.

But that does not mean I don’t see two weird-ass narratives popping up.

First of all, I’m seeing the narrative of, “This is Progressives’ fault.” Hold up. I just told you that pretty much all the Progressives I know cut bait a long time ago. And, no, I realize that doesn’t mean that all of them did. I realize there are some people (addition: A lot of white men, btw) who are just axiomatically stuck on his story and are dismissing any accusations against him as - well, I’m trying and failing to remember/relocate what it was that ticked me off most, but the general argument I hear is, “These are just accusations, not proof.”

And, like…Really? We’re doing that?

I wrote a whole ass article about why Democrats needed to ditch Swalwell, their very centrist guy, because of the accusations against him - and part of that argument was that Democrats needed to have basic fucking standards like, “Don’t fantasize about raping people” and “don’t be a domestic abuser.”

These arguments harken back to my aforementioned “Redemption arc” argument, but in all of the worst ways - conveying him all of the benefits of redemption without any of the criticism that even if we don’t want to condemn him as a person today based on his actions in the past (how far back in the past were they, again?), people still don’t have to make him a Senator.

Yet, there’s another argument I’ve seen crop up - even from some people I like a lot - that I’m just as disappointed with, and - you guessed it - it’s that Susan Collins must be defeated at the voting booth by any means necessary, and if it’s Platner, well, you’ve just gotta vote blue no matter who. It’s the ordinary Blue MAGA shit that is normally leveled against Progressives by conservative candidates, almost like a “Haha we get to pull this shit with you for once” approach to things combined with the same institutionalism (“Dems always”) that just needs to be put out to pasture already.

The problem is…That’s not how this works. Is it?

Remember Ranked Choice Voting? That means that Maine is one of the best states to actually short-circuit the two-party system in.

First off, the Primary in Maine isn’t over. Sure, early voting has started, but anyone voting from here on out can just vote Costello/LaFlamme/Mills and leave Platner off their rankings.

But more importantly, if Platner wins, there is time for a third-party candidate to emerge that would challenge both Platner and Collins. Who this would be is utterly beyond me - it’d have to be someone with enough political strengths to have name recognition, policy advantages, and what I’ll loosely call “stellar charisma.” And while RCV doesn’t make this an absolute, it’d be best if this was just one person running - this would need to be well-coordinated, and not scattershot, although a constellation approach could work (See: Zohran Mamdani & Brad Lander).

But if this hypothetical person can get on the debate stage and challenge both Platner and Collins on the air, and they get media play? It would allow Democrats who want to get rid of Collins - and Republicans who dislike Collins, not that I’m trying to recruit them - to vote third-party and feel like they’ve cleared their conscience before making their party’s nominee their second choice.

And, remember folks - it’s only control of the Senate that might be determined by this race.

Which is why I felt a need to say something, even if this gets like 3 reads.