ON
← Back to feed
United KingdomEconomy13 days ago

The hollow campaign targeting Graham Platner

The article discusses Graham Platner's campaign against Republican Senator Susan Collins in Maine, noting that his platform aligns closely with Bernie Sanders' policies. Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer, faced little opposition in the Democratic primary. The article critiques the New York Times' recent reporting on Platner's personal relationships, suggesting that the claims made are vague and lack concrete evidence.

Graham Platner’s campaign to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine can come across as pretty rote — mostly just reheated Bernie Sanders mantras. It’s hardly surprising that many in the Maine Democratic electorate would be receptive to such messaging. What’s slightly more notable is that Platner, a previously unknown Marine veteran and oyster farmer, is the vehicle for that message in a race that could decide control of the Senate in this year’s midterms. He easily warded off a listless challenge from the incumbent Democratic governor, Janet Mills; the mostly uncontested Dem primary is now days away.

And so, right on cue, here come the “accusations.”

What are these “accusations”? Good question. “Accusations” would seem to overstate the case, because it’s exceedingly unclear what Platner is even being accused of doing. But since the non-accusatory accusations have been dramatically unveiled by the The New York Times , all keen political watchers must now hold their breath and brace for the fallout.

The Times ’s Katie Glueck and Lisa Lerer boast that they “spent months” doggedly reporting on the “complicated history of Platner’s relationships with women.” OK, then — after months of this intrepid investigative journalism, what did the journalists come up with? Reputedly that Platner’s relationship with various ex-girlfriends has at times been “emotionally wrenching.” The dynamic of these relationships, dating back to his 20s, is said to have been “volatile” and even “toxic.” And his behavior? “Unsettling.”

These are the fruits of a New York Times enterprise project to canvas Platner’s ex-girlfriends, already a creepy enough initiative in its own right — and the worst they could uncover is that a handful of ex-girlfriends use vaguely unflattering adjectives to describe their subjective emotional recollections of certain interactions with Platner, stemming from consensual adult romantic activity a decade or more ago.

One ex, Lyndsey Fifield, alleges that Platner grabbed her roughly and, in one instance, “yanked her out of a cab” in the course of “altercations.” Fifield happens to be a long-time Republican operative, having served in multiple GOP political action committees and currently listed as a visiting fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, a conservative think tank. Her affiliations are alluded to by the Times , which notes that the paper “could not independently corroborate Ms. Fifield’s account.”

If this is what we’re really doing now, why doesn’t somebody go and canvass the ex-boyfriends of Katie Glueck and Lisa Lerer? They evidently deem it newsworthy that former love interests of Platner claim to have endured “emotionally wrenching” relationship travails. Given the prominent perches Glueck and Lerer enjoy at the New York Times , certainly they rank high enough on the all-important “power dynamic” pyramid that the public would be similarly entitled to know if anything “emotionally wrenching” or “volatile” might have occurred in their own private lives when they were in their 20s.

Robust reportorial resources should thus be devoted to explore this harrowing possibility, with any resulting material reframed and reinterpreted many years after the fact to comport with whatever news-cycle imperatives might arise on a given week. New York Times readers have every right to evaluate whether their own unreported romantic histories might be exerting undue influence on their 2026 midterm election coverage.

God forbid either journalist be alleged by some disgruntled ex to have exhibited behavior that could be retroactively characterised as “toxic.” And if Glueck or Lerer wishes to dispute that characterisation, perhaps for a lack of context or any other mitigating factors they may wish to cite, they’re plain out of luck, because everyone knows it’s a lose-lose situation to be rehashing dirty relationship laundry in the pages of The New York Times . The more you talk, the worse you look, regardless of what the truth happens to be.

If by any chance either female journalist has ever had an “off-and-on long-distance relationship” with old boyfriends who may have less than flattering memories of the experience, this is now to be considered straightforwardly reportable information, given the new Platner standard they’ve opted to set forth. Any relevant anecdotes would need to be fleshed out with ambiguously motivated remembrances of the journalists’ past emotional traits, since this is the kind of psychobabble that litters the Platner exposĂ©. (For reference, Katie graduated from Northwestern University in 2012 and Lisa graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 2001, so those are some decent leads to start with for any shoeleather reporters out there looking to better inform the public about contemporary power dynamics in America.)

Fifield, the flagship “accuser” in this Times story, doesn’t appear to be accusing Platner of anything in particular (though she has since taken to the X app ,


Read the full article at UnHerd →
Source document: The New York Times

1 reports

UnHerdIndependentCenter13 days ago
The hollow campaign targeting Graham Platner

The article discusses Graham Platner's campaign against Republican Senator Susan Collins in Maine, noting that his platform aligns closely with Bernie Sanders' policies. Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer, faced little opposition in the Democratic primary. The article critiques the New York Times' recent reporting on Platner's personal relationships, suggesting that the claims made are vague and lack concrete evidence.

Bias read (Center): The article presents information without overtly favoring one side. It critiques the New York Times' reporting but does so in a balanced manner, highlighting the lack of concrete evidence rather than making definitive judgments. The tone remains neutral, focusing on the ambiguity of the allegations.

Official sources cited

Go to the primary sources (1)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.