The progressive wing of the Democratic Party is facing criticism for its initial support of Senate candidate Graham Platner, who is now the subject of a rape allegation. Readers have expressed dismay at the party's apparent shift in stance, questioning their vetting procedures and the timing of their condemnation.
One letter writer observed that the Democratic Party spent months offering excuses for Platner before an ex-girlfriend came forward with the rape allegation. The writer questioned what actions the party would take if Platner were found guilty and suggested that the party's connection to a perceived "breakdown of the law" might attract individuals with serious criminal accusations.
Another correspondent highlighted a perceived inconsistency, contrasting the party's response to an alleged SS tattoo with their reaction to the rape allegation. "So having tattooed a symbol advocating for the horrors committed against Jews is not worthy of condemnation?" the writer asked, before noting that upon hearing of the rape allegation, senators condemned Platner in what was described as a "phony gesture of nobility."
Concerns were also raised about the influence of poll numbers on the Democratic Party's decision-making. One reader stated that when Platner was polling 10 points ahead of his Republican opponent, Sen. Susan Collins, politicians broadly welcomed him into the party's "large tent," even with a "Nazi tattoo" and "accused sexual predator" labels. However, as his poll numbers declined and Collins gained ground, these same Democrats, according to the letter, "decided to believe all women."
This sentiment was echoed by another reader who listed a series of alleged transgressions – a Nazi tattoo, assault allegations, and disparaging remarks about combat veterans – as being initially acceptable. The writer concluded that only the rape allegation prompted the party to declare Platner "not our kind of man anymore," calling the Democratic Party a "national embarrassment."
Questions were also posed regarding the Democratic "headhunters" who selected Platner as their nominee. One letter inquired about the vetting process, suggesting that if Platner, with "all his warts," was the best candidate they could find, it raised doubts about who they might have rejected.
The letters were published in response to reporting on the allegations against Platner, who is running for the Senate in Maine. The New York Post compilation of letters reflects reader reactions to the evolving situation and the party's handling of the allegations.