This is Francesca Hong, a Democratic Socialist who is ahead in the polls for the Democratic Party nomination for Wisconsin governor, speaking in the streets of Madison yesterday after a fatal shooting by the police.

pic.twitter.com/YXlgytpDrc

— Laura Schulte (@SchulteLaura) July 23, 2026

For background on the polling: "Democratic socialist leads Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial field: Poll" (The Hill).

For background on the shooting: "Wisconsin officer kills man armed with knife, police say, as shooting sparks protests/Madison police said that after a chase and a struggle, a man who was being sought pulled out a knife and injured an officer, which led to the deadly shooting" (NBC News)("Videos of the shooting were captured by bystanders and were circulated online. One of them, verified by NBC News, appears to show officers holding on to the man as someone yells, 'Let go!' Multiple shouts of 'He’s got a knife!' can be heard....The shooting was not captured on body camera video, which the Madison Police Department does not widely use").

ADDED: Interrupting the Concerts on the Square can't be the best way to win over moderates. It was a beautiful day and this is an extremely well-established and much-loved Madison tradition:

Protesters have taken the stage at Concerts on the Square pic.twitter.com/PPXQo6Jgm9

— Madison365 (@madison_365) July 23, 2026

AND: Here's bystander video of the incident.

"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...."

"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.

"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? 

"You said: He's your kind of man."

CNBC host calls out Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Host: "You campaigned with Graham Platner… you said, 'He's your kind of man.' … This is a guy who had a chest tattoo with a N*zi symbol… It's a guy that reportedly wrote 'people concerned about r*pe should take some responsibility… pic.twitter.com/zcy7r7BqnW

— Resist the Mainstream (@ResisttheMS) April 22, 2026

You can see that's from back in April, but it appeared at the top of the feed when I clicked on the "Platner" trend in the sidebar at X.

The timing of all of this matters. What did they know and when did they know it? Did they hold the accuser back and then let her loose? Look at Jake Tapper seeming to want something of an answer:

NEW: Woman who accused Graham Platner of r*ping her says America needs someone with his political stances in office, says his videos fired her up.

Jake Tapper: There are gonna be people who say this is politically motivated. What would you say to that?

Accuser Jenny Racicot:… pic.twitter.com/7jYk2i7oBg

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) July 6, 2026

I'm less interested in the random oysterman than I am in the Democratic Party leadership, what they were up to, and what they are doing now. It's so much like the story of Joe Biden's candidacy in 2024. They let the primary process occur, propped the guy up while democracy was in play, let the people expend their power to choose, and then and only then a fatal defect got exposed, and the people's choice had to withdraw himself. The Party got to insert their candidate, someone who never had to face the test of the primary. I want to hold the Party responsible for what it did. Was it just idiotically searching around for a "masculine" man and infatuated with his oysters? Did it cynically select him and think the people don't care about sexual misdeeds anymore — the #MeToo era is over and it's time to go for those "manosphere" votes?

ADDED: When I first clicked on this, I thought it was a humor sketch. The creaky voice on this Moraff character is something else: 

Graham Platner was recruited to run for Senate by a pair of socialist political operatives, Daniel Moraff and Leanne Fan, who determined that another prospective candidate had “a skeleton in the closet.”

The Wall Street Journal published a rare interview with the duo on Sunday… pic.twitter.com/tbmOE5nxJX

— Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) June 8, 2026

AND: Scott Jennings puts it well:

Democrats fully vetted Graham Platner, happily signed off on his incredibly disturbing history to win a Senate seat, and are only pretending to be shocked now because they can no longer rationalize the hypocrisy. pic.twitter.com/jkp12Gwv16

— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) July 7, 2026

"The DSA, in fact, seems to despise the Democratic Party. Darializa Avila Chevalier has called Joe Biden a 'rapist' and wrote 'Fuck Kamala Harris'..."

"... on social media. She proceeded to be nominated for a House race in New York last week by Democratic voters who presumably do not all share those feelings. The DSA now includes a growing caucus of supporters in Congress, has mayoral candidates well positioned to win in several big cities, and has plans to throw its weight behind a yet-to-be-determined presidential candidate in 2028. The DSA’s feelings about Democrats encompass not only the party’s leadership but also the philosophical commitments that have guided it since the New Deal: a mixed economy undergirded by democratic values. Chevalier, for instance, joined a post–October 7 celebratory rally and portrayed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a defensive response to Western 'bullying.' She previously called for seizing land and the means of production and has repeatedly praised communism. These positions are not holdovers from the idealism of youth or a bygone 'woke' era. They are a by-product of the DSA’s core ideology. The DSA has become a force in Democratic Party politics even as it has grown more hostile to the party, more illiberal, and more dogmatic...."

I'm reading "There’s Nothing Democratic About These Socialists," by Jonathan Chait, at The Atlantic.

"Melat Kiros, a 29-year-old democratic socialist... unseats a 15-term incumbent and further propels the insurgent coalition..."

"... that swept a series of congressional contests last week in New York. Ms. Kiros, an immigrant and first-time candidate, was born the year after [Rep. Diana] DeGette, 68, took office. Her victory in the solidly Democratic district [Denver] all but ensures her election in November.... Her opposition to U.S. support for Israel was also a cornerstone of her campaign and central to her political identity.... In her campaign biography, Ms. Kiros highlighted the fact that the Manhattan law firm where she once worked had fired her in 2023 after she refused to take down a letter that raised questions about Israel’s historical legitimacy, defended pro-Palestinian campus protesters and challenged the firm’s response to activist law students. She has faced criticism for declining to call antisemitic a fatal firebombing attack in Boulder, Colo., on people who were marching in support of Israeli hostages...."

The NYT reports.

Here's the Axios report, "House Dems rocked by another socialist upset: 'Wake up call'":

"These people are not Democrats.... I’m not in that f*cking political party."

"I am totally comfortable in a political party that spends time questioning the policies of the government of Israel. In fact, I’m enthusiastic about that. I don’t want to be in a political party that denies the right of the state of Israel to exist. That’s just not– I just can’t do that."

Said James Carville, quoted in "'I’m Done, I’m Not in That F*cking Political Party': James Carville Freaks Out After Progressives Win Big in Democratic Primaries" (Mediaite).

I think Carville is copying Carlson. See "'I'm out': Tucker Carlson says he's done with the GOP" (Axios).

"Keep a constant watch on the doubtful voters, and from time to time have them talked to by those in whom they have the most confidence."

Wrote Abraham Lincoln, in an 1840 letter, quoted by Ben Wikler, in "My State Was a 'Democracy Desert.' This Is How We Turned It Around" (NYT)(gift link)

"My State" = Wisconsin. Ben was chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party from 2019 to 2025. 

He continues: "There’s a name for that approach today: 'relational organizing.' It starts with the recognition that people will be more open to a new message if they trust the messenger. So if you want to build a movement, build trust. Seek to do this outside of your own political bubble, because the people who are most apt to change their minds about politics are generally the people who are the least interested in it. Your goal should be to join or build a group that engages voters who don’t live, sleep, eat and breathe politics — in a barbershop, at a fish fry or at a farmers’ market."

I wrote about the term "relational organizing" back in 2023 — here — based on a WaPo piece the quoted Wikler. I said:

"Democrats need organized voters. The political mobilization that the civil rights movement built..."

"... and that has propelled Democrats to victories across the country is aging. The G.O.P. is racing to disorganize and dilute Black electoral power across the South and the Voting Rights Act is all but dead. Your guess about the Democratic Party’s plan to fill the gaps is as good as mine. The party seems to want some kind of economic populist message without embracing the demographic reality that a member of the working class is just as likely to be Black or a woman as a white dude in a Carhartt...."

Writes Tressie McMillan Cottom, in "This Could Be the Winning Issue for Democrats" (NYT).

The suggested winning issue is opposition to data centers: "Americans hate data centers. They really, really hate them.... Data centers evoke strong emotions because they are tangible. Voters can hear them, smell them and see them.... [W]hen political problems become local, people can be persuaded to look beyond their party affiliation or even their own social class to help one another...."

"Reviving a political dynasty is best not left to chance.... But just hours into his Day 1 launch, the candidate abruptly announced a change of plans..."

"... according to three people familiar with the events. Forget dialing for dollars — Mr. Schlossberg said he needed a nap. He then effectively disappeared for the day, leaving his team reeling.... [A] group of fellow Democrats, family friends, union leaders and others with direct knowledge of the campaign described an operation so erratic and plagued by turnover that it raises questions about how he might handle himself as a member of Congress. Especially early on, Mr. Schlossberg would regularly blow off weekly strategy meetings called for his benefit, and made a habit of disappearing for long stretches with little notice or explanation. (He did carve out time to swim or paddleboard in the Hudson most days.)...." 

That's the NYT in "Inside Jack Schlossberg’s Chaotic Campaign to Revive Camelot/Erratic behavior and staff turnover have colored Mr. Schlossberg’s bid for a House seat in New York, raising questions about his readiness for office." 

Sounds like a lot of Democrats want to be rid of Schlossberg and the NYT is there to help. 

What did he do that's so bad — sleep and swim? I'd say let Schlossberg be Schlossberg.

And the Dems look desperate. Another NYT tab I have open in my browser right now is "Democrats Can’t Let This Antisemitic Sex Therapist Win Her Runoff." 

"When we were fighting for gay rights — a fight I think we have essentially won — we knew that some issues were more popular than others."

"So we tended to start by trying to win the ones that were most popular. Gays in the military. Employment. We didn’t go after same-sex marriage, we didn’t make marriage a litmus test, until the very end. I analogize that to male-to-female transgender sports. That is the most controversial part of the agenda — the equivalent of gay marriage — so put it at the end. If you go at it that way, you build support for it. But if you insist on the most controversial parts all at once, you make it harder."

Said Barney Frank, quoted in "Barney Frank, in Hospice, Has Advice for the Democrats/Mr. Frank speaks about the missteps of the Democratic Party and his hope for its future. 'Frankly, if I weren’t dying, people wouldn’t be paying as much attention'" (NYT).

Key word: "typically."

Jen Psaki on the 2028 Dem primary:

"There is no, thank God, dark room in Washington where people sit around and they decide here's who the nominee is going to be."

She just described exactly how the last Democrat presidential nominee was chosen. pic.twitter.com/5QpQagvG6t

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) May 7, 2026

What's with all that finger-pointing business?

"'If the Democratic Party is to flourish in the future,' Mr. Platner told me, 'it needs to be an antiwar party.'"

"As talks to end the latest disastrous war focus on reopening a narrow strait of water that was open before the war began, this seems like an obvious conclusion. And yet many Democratic politicians would most likely be wary of embracing it.... [M]any Democrats seem to fear being seen as antiwar. What if they vote against wartime funding, and then an Iranian attack targets U.S. troops or the homeland? Or what if Mr. Trump bombs Iran, and the regime collapses and is replaced by something better? You could feel this calculation within the Democratic Party as the war began — a hedging that only dissipated when the war’s brutality and insanity became clear.... We like to frame our wars as virtuous, but they are not. Instead, they resemble a declining empire sowing chaos along its periphery as a matter of strategy.... [T]he forever war has been destroying America from within, like an organism that must keep growing to survive, filling us with fear of outsiders and contempt for one another. War does that to societies: Once you normalize taking human life abroad, you tend not to value it at home...."

Writes Ben Rhodes, in "Graham Platner Went to Hell and Back. He Has a Simple Message for Democrats" (NYT).

Rhodes was a speechwriter for Obama. Platner is the likely Democratic Party candidate for U.S. Senator for Maine. 

Is it terrible or is that a huge loophole?

Terrible https://t.co/geK2swDv82

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 22, 2026

The litigation is already pending: "Lawsuits pending at Virginia Supreme Court over redistricting referendum" (ABC 13 News). There are 3 lawsuits, 2 of which challenge the language. The vote was allowed to go through, but we'll see what the court says. I can see how one might argue that the voters didn’t approve of anything that doesn’t "restore fairness" and the plan put forward by the Democrats was designed for the purpose of advancing the party— not to restore fairness — so the voters did not approve it.

"I wish I could designate myself as a 'foreign-policy Republican,' but there’s no such option, so I have to go whole hog."

"By registering as a Republican rather than an independent, maybe I can have some influence on moving some Republican policies toward the center. I have given up on trying to change the Democratic Party. My main goal is to send a message that many traditional Democratic voters can’t accept what it is becoming—a replica of left-wing European parties that are hurting their countries."

Writes Alan Dershowitz, in "Why I’m Becoming a Republican/I first registered as a Democrat in 1959. The party’s hostility to Israel is too much" (Wall Street Journal).

"Ken Martin, the chairman of the D.N.C., said on Thursday that he had decided not to publish a report that he ordered months ago into what went wrong for the Democratic Party last year...."

"Mr. Martin will instead keep the findings under seal. He believes that looking back so publicly and painfully at the past would prove counterproductive for the party as it tries next year to take back power in Congress.... 'Here’s our North Star: Does this help us win?' Mr. Martin said in a statement. 'If the answer is no, it’s a distraction from the core mission.'... Some Democratic donors have demanded a more thorough accounting of how exactly the party and Ms. Harris spent $1.5 billion in 15 weeks en route to losing every battleground state in 2024...."

From "The D.N.C. Is Scrapping Its Report on What Went Wrong in 2024/Ken Martin, the Democratic National Committee chairman, ordered the autopsy months ago but is now said to believe that its release would be counterproductive for the party" (NYT).

"[I]t has become nearly impossible to attend a Democratic political event without encountering a 'creator hour,' an influencer briefing or a lineup of one-on-one interviews with Substackers and independent podcasters...."

"Are Democrats on par with Republicans in the digital media space? Not yet. The gap remains wide, according to audience numbers and interviews with creators and strategists. Republicans dismiss their efforts as phony. 'What they need to stop doing is trying to copy our homework and go invent something of their own,' said CJ Pearson, a conservative influencer and podcast host. 'If they do that, it’ll be a lot more authentic than whatever they’re doing right now.'... But even the friendly confines of liberal media can turn hostile. Creators who bring strong political opinions to interviews sometimes push Democrats harder than expected, said Kyle Tharp, author of a newsletter about politics and online influence.... Tharp predicted the creator class will wield even more power in the 2028 presidential campaign. 'Some of these campaigns are going to be handing them a bag of cash for an endorsement,' he said. 'People are really going to want some of these major Democratic talkers’ endorsements in the next campaign.'"

From "How Democrats are building their own digital media army/The 2024 election spurred Democrats to seek out podcasts and social media creators to spread their message and catch up with their Republican counterparts" (WaPo)(free link).

I'm suddenly remembering the "Authenticity" trend that seems to have peaked last August.

I think good social media emerges organically. Ask Joe Rogan. These top-down efforts are not going to produce the right influencer/influencee relationship. And I've been watching the Democratic Party try to do this since the 2004 campaign, when it coddled bloggers.

"I'm a stickler for staying in your lane. I think his lane is the Ezra-lane..."

"... and I don't see him crossing a line. I'm assuming the New York Times is cool with it."

Said Jill Abramson, former executive editor, of the NYT, quoted in "How Ezra Klein's power play is guiding Democrats" (Axios), which tells us that "Klein's columnist-turned-operative role is raising concerns inside the Times and the Democratic Party, people familiar with the matter tell Axios."

ADDED: If anyone ever tells me to stay in my lane, I'm going to say I am in my lane. My lane is The Althouse Lane. I encourage you all to do likewise. Abramson okayed this clever move and she's a stickler for staying in your lane.

"His beefy tattooed arms and weathered face made him look like a live-action Popeye. He’s often styled in a dirty ball cap and ragged T-shirt...."

"... implying a sort of everyman machismo. It’s the kind of look that suggests (U.S. Senate candidate Graham) Platner could be the Democratic Party’s new great white hope — a working-class white man who can speak to class antagonism in an economically unequal electorate. There’s just one teensy-weensy problem. It turns out that friend-of-the-white-working-class had a Nazi tattoo. The tattoo resembles a Totenkopf, a well-known symbol of official Nazis, the Nazi-adjacent and people who just think that Nazi iconography is tough. The gist is that Platner got the tattoo in 2007 in Croatia when he was on leave with his fellow Marines. Platner has said that he didn’t know the symbol’s semiotics. He only knew that Marines get 'terrifying-looking' tattoos...."

Writes Tressie McMillan Cottom, in "A Nazi Tattoo Exposes Democrats’ Greatest Weakness" (NYT). I've made that a gift link so you can try to figure out what this "greatest weakness" is supposed to be.