"I like Graham Platner. You like Graham Platner"/"That's my kind of man."

SUPERCUT!

Dems explain why Nazi tattoos & sexually aggressive behavior are fine actually pic.twitter.com/xeLPHh9fwN

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 8, 2026

"No one could have seen this coming."

I can’t believe they made a Graham Platner biopic where he’s a sexting nazi rapist graham cracker… pic.twitter.com/gYDy7fAnAh

— TBC (@TBC_on_X) July 8, 2026

Summer sunrise, with rain that looks like snow.

Video by Meade.

"I’m worried about Weimar America. That’s the title of the next book I’m working on. The first thing people say when they hear that is..."

"... 'Oh, is this a "Trump is Hitler" book?' No, Trump barely figures in this book. When we hear Weimar, we think of the film 'Cabaret' and corruption, and we think it all ended up in Nazism. But that is a superficial understanding of it. We have created in America today, perhaps throughout the West, the psychosocial conditions of Weimar without having suffered the traumas that Germany did — losing the First World War, hyperinflation, and the Great Depression. This also goes back to Hannah Arendt and her famous 1951 book, 'The Origins of Totalitarianism.' She tried to explain how it was that right-wing totalitarianism in Germany and a left-wing version in Russia rose, and she said social atomization is by far the most important factor...."

Says Rod Dreher, quoted in "'I'm Worried About Weimar America'/'It may not be Hitler 2.0. It may not be Stalin 2.0. It might be something all American, but it’s not going to be what we’re used to,' the author Rod Dreher argues" (NYT). This is Ross Douthat's podcast "Interesting Times," and you can listen to the whole thing and read the transcript here (and elsewhere).

Bonus: "What is fascism?" 

Souvenirs.

"Officers said they observed Mr. Thiers and Mr. Carreno reach their hands into the water, peel pieces of blue sealant off and pull them out of the water, according to arrest records. Officers also found a piece of the reflecting pool liner in Ms. Dennison-Gibby’s purse, the records showed."

From "Three More People Charged With Damaging Reflecting Pool/The three individuals face misdemeanor charges of causing damage worth less than $1,000. Experts have said that the problems could have been caused by the pool’s makeover" (NYT).

"It’s tempting to treat this as a story of one flawed man and a vetting process that failed.... But the more uncomfortable lesson..."

"... is the one that the Platner boom offered before the bust. The hunger that lifted him — the overflow crowds, the volunteer armies, the sense that here, at last, was someone who meant it — was real.... Handed the chance to litigate what the party actually believes, Democrats have mostly declined.... Mr. Platner’s appeal was never really about oysters or facial hair. It was that he seemed to stand for something. He was angry on voters’ behalf about an economy that seems rigged for the powerful, and he was unafraid to say so. People responded to the promise of conviction. That signal is the one the party ought to be reading. The tragedy of a campaign like his is not only that it collapsed, as it deserved to, but that so much energy was poured into a messenger before anyone was sure of the message...."

So says the New York Times Editorial Board, in "The Democrats Can’t Go On Like This.

So "he seemed to stand for something," but we really don't know what, and instead of letting us argue publicly about what that message was and whether it is what we want, they took out the man. I think they had the ability all along to destroy him as a man, but they propped him up as a man. The Nazi tattoo was somehow okay! But when they decided they needed to replace him (presumably, because he wasn't going to win), they used the personal material to take him out.

Here's how Platner himself explained it as he bowed to the Party's demand that he drop the nomination the primary voters had given him: "I think it's really important to understand why this is happening in the timeline, why this is happening right now.... there is a reason that this is happening now...."

Total eclipse.

Bonnie Tyler has died: "Bonnie Tyler obituary: gravel-voiced singer of Total Eclipse of the Heart/The most successful Welsh female singer since Shirley Bassey did not have her first hit until 25, but went on to sell 100 million records" (London Times).

There is also the literal version of that song, a wonderful examination of the absurdities of 1980s music video:

"I left Google to study neuroscience, and what I found in the research literature helps explain why the A.I. summary poses a danger to learning."

"Curiosity, it turns out, is not just an individual’s desire to find out discrete facts; it’s also a feature of our biology designed to help us learn more broadly. And it requires a specific condition: a gap between what you want to know and what you find out. Researchers have found that people in a state of curiosity, while waiting for an answer to an intriguing question, remember unrelated information they encounter during that time far better than they otherwise would. In that same study, the researchers also placed those people in brain scanners. They found that waiting for an answer activates reward circuits in the brain and readies the hippocampus to help form new memories.... Curiosity opens a window, and while the window is open, learning deepens across the board.... Our technology is increasingly treating the territory between the query and the answer as dead space to be eliminated, when that territory is where most of the learning actually happens. The danger is not that people will stop asking questions. It is that questions will become endpoints...."

Writes Anne-Laure Le Cunff, "a neuroscientist who studies curiosity," in "We Are Losing the Ability to Discover What We Didn’t Know to Ask" (NYT).

Intriguing questions that popped up for me: 1. What kind of name is "Le Cunff"? 2. "The danger is not.../It is..." seems to be one of those things — like em dashes and the word "delve" — that A.I. tends to write, so did Le Cunff use A.I. to write this essay?

Answers: 1. It means "the gentle," "the affable," or "the debonnaire." 2. It's a rhetorical device that A.I. has learned from real human writers, and real human writers don't need to avoid it, they just, as always, need to use it well, which, in this case, Le Cunff did. 

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you like in the comments... except Platner. Go one post down for that. And Trump and Iran. Go 2 posts down for that.

"It is him who is wanting to hold on. He is having to come to terms that his dream is dead. The show is over, this is done."

Said an unnamed Democrat, said to be "close to Platner," quoted in "Graham Platner, isolated, defies Maine Democrats as they try to hatch a plan/People close to the Senate candidate’s campaign say that they know he has to drop out but that Platner has struggled with the decision" (WaPo)(gift link).

And there's this, from Devon Murphy-Anderson, executive director of the Maine Democratic Party: "Unfortunately, Graham Platner’s team has repeatedly reached out to us in an attempt to put their thumb on the scale of what this process looks like. We have repeatedly reiterated to Graham Platner’s team that they have no role in determining our next Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate."

But he won the primary. Shouldn't that at least mean that someone with the same political orientation should replace him? Otherwise, it seems as though the part of the Democratic Party that lost in the primary process is stealing the nomination. That means the only way Platner’s team can have any role in determining the nominee is for Platner to hang onto the nomination he won. Unfortunately for the Party, it has no role in stopping him. 

He wants to hold on? He can hold on. The dream is dead? Hold onto that dream.

 

UPDATE: Platner abandons his dream. He’s out. Watch his video here.

"President Trump abruptly announced Wednesday that he would not fly out of Turkey aboard his luxurious new Air Force One..."

"...  stoking speculation that the Qatar-donated jet may be vulnerable to Iranian fire as the war resumes. Trump instead departed the annual NATO summit using the older model of Air Force One, which he had stopped using last week in favor of the $400 million 'palace on wings' that he has proudly boasted about acquiring.... 'I’m number one on the kill list for Iran. They’re lovely people,' Trump told a Post reporter who asked if security concerns motivated the switch. Earlier in the day, Trump had said, 'They want to take out the US leader, me … And so far, I guess I’ve been a little bit lucky. But that maybe doesn’t last very long.'"

From "Trump ditches new Air Force One in Turkey, stoking Iran threat intrigue: 'I’m number one on the kill list'" (NY Post).

"A pilot jumped out of the door of a moving plane to his death, leaving the student he was teaching to fly to land the aircraft by herself. "

"Flight instructor Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, 42, was found dead following the incident, which took place in Toledo, central Argentina, on Saturday.... The student said Bertazzo told her, 'You know what you have to do, carry on,' before taking off his headset and seatbelt, opening the door and jumping out of the plane...."

From "Flight school pilot jumps to his death midair, leaving student to land plane" (CNN).

Maxxing out.

"Texas looksmaxxing influencer Connor Michael Murphy has drowned in Thailand after he was seen acting erratically and jumping in a lake to avoid cops.... The 32-year-old self-proclaimed 'giga chad,' or alpha-male, had earlier sparked alarm with his erratic behavior as he argued with a security guard at the estate.... His 22-year-old girlfriend said she had no idea what caused the outburst — but claimed he had previously splattered paint in the property while she was sleeping...."

The New York Post reports.

Here's how he looked before he maxxed out:

"After an uncredited part as a masseuse in the Peter Sellers comedy 'What’s New Pussycat?' (1965), written by Mr. Allen, and a voice-over in 'What’s Up, Tiger Lily?' (1966), Mr. Allen’s directorial debut..."

"... Ms. Lasser had full-fledged roles — with character names and screen time — in Mr. Allen’s next three auteur efforts, which he wrote, directed and starred in. In 'Take the Money and Run' (1969), she was a bank robber’s neighbor, impressed by his fame. In 'Bananas' (1971), she was the hero’s activist girlfriend who drops him because he shows no political leadership skills. The next year, in 'Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid to Ask),' she played a woman who could achieve orgasm only in public. In the middle of all that filmmaking, in 1970, the Allens divorced...."

From "Louise Lasser, Star of TV’s ‘Mary Hartman,’ Is Dead at 87/She began her screen career in Woody Allen movies (he was also her husband), but she was best known for her portrayal of the Ohio housewife in the pigtails and puffed sleeves" (NYT).

McDreamy.

From "Here Are the Maine Democrats Who Might Replace Graham Platner/Mr. Platner has not yet withdrawn from the race after a rape allegation, but Democrats in the state and nationally are already exploring potential alternatives" (NYT):

Platner was presented by the Democrats as fulfilling the people's supposed longing for masculinity, so, yeah, replace him with Patrick Dempsey. That makes sense.

"Firefighters used ropes to rescue her and the couple’s two children, a 7-year-old girl and a 4-year-old boy, from the mangled Tesla."

"The children were uninjured, the authorities said at the time. The California Highway Patrol quickly determined the crash had been 'an intentional act.'"

From "Charges Against Man Who Drove Family Off Cliff Are Dropped After Treatment/Three counts of attempted murder against Dharmesh A. Patel were dismissed after he completed a court-ordered mental health program, prosecutors said" (NYT).

It was a 250-foot drop.

"'He can drive home tonight,' said [Steve Wagstaffe, the San Mateo County district attorney], whose office opposed the diversion program and had asked the court to bring Mr. Patel to trial. 'It’s like the case never happened.'"

"Rape claim against Democrat has party asking: Why did we ignore 'red flags'?"

That's the headline at the London Times, a question that assumes a proposition I don't accept as true. Democrats didn't ignore red flags. They saw them and went forward anyway.

The question should be why did they do that, and we know why. It's not hard to figure out. I don't for one minute believe that Democrats are deeply contemplating why they backed Platner despite what they knew. They wanted to win the Senate seat, and they imagined he was their best hope. Now, they are trying to act as though they were blindsided by this rape accusation, and it suddenly disqualifies Platner in a new way.

By the way, what's Platner's motivation to withdraw? He won the primary. It's his nomination. What's good is there for him in withdrawing? If he hangs on for a few more days, past the July 13th deadline for replacing him as the candidate, won't the heat die down? He will have weathered the storm, and he can present himself as a rebellious survivor.

Yes, he may lose, and that loss may be the one Senate seat that denies Democrats the majority they covet, but so what? I mean: "So what?" from his point of view. Should he shrink back into oyster-ridden obscurity because of a rape he says he did not commit? Because of a tattoo everyone knew about when he won the primary?