Senate Democrats have sparked significant controversy following their silence on a progressive candidate’s Nazi-style tattoo, a move that contrasts sharply with their earlier criticism of Pete Hegseth’s religious-themed symbols. Prominent Democrats, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Tammy Duckworth, had previously expressed strong disapproval of Hegseth’s tattoos, which they linked to Christian nationalism and right-wing extremism, despite his position as Secretary of War.
The current silence on Graham Platner’s tattoo has led to speculation about the party’s priorities. Platner, a Marine veteran and progressive candidate endorsed by notable figures like Senator Bernie Sanders, has faced backlash for his Nazi-style chest tattoo, resembling the Totenkopf symbol. Earlier, he claimed the design was chosen randomly during a night of drinking on leave in Croatia and has since covered it with another tattoo of dogs. However, his defense has not stemmed the criticism.
Warren, who has publicly supported Platner’s candidacy, expressed enthusiasm for his entry into the Senate race, emphasizing his potential to represent marginalized communities. Yet, she and Duckworth, who once criticized Hegseth’s symbols as extremist, have not issued any statements on Platner’s tattoo, despite being contacted by Fox News Digital. This absence of public response has raised questions about their consistency in addressing symbolic imagery among political figures.
Meanwhile, Sanders’ campaign has defended Platner, insisting that his candidacy remains strong despite the controversy. The senator’s spokesperson highlighted that the focus should remain on more pressing issues, while expressing support for Platner as a candidate. The situation underscores the challenges political figures face in balancing personal expression with the expectations of their party and the public.
The contrast in the Democratic Party’s response to Hegseth’s and Platner’s tattoos has ignited debates about the party’s stance on symbolic imagery, suggesting a potential shift or inconsistency in their approach to such issues. As the Senate race in Maine progresses, the handling of this controversy may have broader implications for the party’s messaging and public perception.