Can Graham Platner survive another controversy? | NPR’s Newsmakers

PR's newsmakers, where we interview some of the most influential people of our time.

Today, Graham Platner, Democratic Senate candidate from Maine. You can hear more interviews like this one on newsmakers, follow or subscribe to the show on Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you watch or listen. You can also find it in the NPR app and now here's our episode with Graham Platner. The path to turning the Senate blue runs in part through the state of Maine and that hinges

on the presumptive Democratic nominee Graham Platner. But Platner's controversial past keeps catching up with him. On May 30 reports emerged that Platner exchanged sexually explicit messages with multiple women early in his marriage. His wife, Amy Gertner, defended him in a video posted on X.

“I think it's shameful behavior to spend time and energy and resources on negative ads.”

And negative stories on Graham when all he's trying to do is improve the lives of people

who work for a living. The controversies around Platner don't end there. When they raise a big question, does he have too much baggage to carry on or can his anti-establishment political message that has generated so much enthusiasm among the Democratic base carry him through?

I spoke to Graham Platner in Maine before news broke of these explicit messages. We offered him a follow-up interview to discuss the latest scandal. His campaign said he was too busy. But Platner provided a statement that read in part. I've learned throughout this campaign that people don't care about gossip or headlines.

They care that you're fighting for their hospitals, their paycheck, their kids. Thank you so much for sitting down with me. Of course. Thanks for having me. So we're sitting here.

This is Maine Carpenters Union. Yep. I want to talk about why we're having the conversation we are here at this place when it means to you. I firmly believe that re-empowering organized labor is going to be one of the keys to building

“the power necessary to really take back our democracy from corporate interests, honestly,”

from the interest of money, from the interest of billionaires.

Historically organized labor has always really been the kind of foundation of any kind

of real movement politics that is able to advocate for working people. And so being able to build a close relationship with labor, being able to go be an advocate for labor in the United States Senate. This is a pretty, I don't core part of my politics. And so the relationships I've been able to build with the unions here in Maine, and it's

been an absolute honor. And it also is, I think, kind of core to the project we're undertaking, which is turning the democratic party back into the party of working people, back into the party that represents the interests of those who work, and frankly, those who are often exploited. So you can't represent the interests of those who are exploited, and represent the interests

of those who are exploiting them at the same time. But for quite some time now, there's an element of the party that has tried to do that. So you're saying the democratic party right now is not a party for the working class.

“I think if you ask working people in this country, which they would say no, which is reflected”

in the polling at the moment, and has been for quite some time. Just approval ratings for the president are bad, but for the party are worse. They're worse. That's right. So why did you choose to run as a Democrat?

Well, because I am one, I've been a registered Democrat my entire life, and I firmly believe that the democratic party should be the party of labor unions, should be the party of community organizations, should be the party of civil rights organizations, should be the party that advocates continuously for systemic and structural change that is going to make this society uplift all of us.

Instead of creating structures that allow for the consolidation of wealth and power, and keep that wealth and power in the hands of very few, there are many people who talk about the democratic party as it once was, a party that used to represent labor unions, used to represent working people, and that one of the reasons why it is lost that support is because it's ceased being that, and I believe it still can be.

This week on Sources and Methods, what a p-steal between the U.S. and Iran might look like. Just as similar would it be to the Obama administration deal that President Trump ripped up? If Trump allows some enrichment, which is what the Iranians demand, then everyone's going to be saying, "Well, wait a minute, how is this different from what Obama had?"

Just more of the week's biggest nationals' security news on Sources and Methods, listen

What makes you qualified to be the senator for Maine, I mean, especially given the questions

“around your lack of political background, lack of running a huge business and so on?”

Well, it is very funny to me that we've created this idea that you can only represent like the average American if you're rich, or if you've spent a bunch of time around wealth and power, which is funny because the average American has not spent a bunch of time around wealth and power. The average American is not rich, does not come from some kind of specialized background

that we have elevated. I actually think there is a story that's really coalesced in the last 50 years, which is this kind of, there's a gatekeeping about power. It's this idea that power is only for people who have a specific last name or who come from wealth or who are already connected to it, people who have a specific kind of business

background or have some kind of educational background.

They're the ones who are competent, they're the ones who are worthy of wielding power. And that's not true. It's simply not true. One, they've been the ones wielding power for the past 50 years, look where it got us. I don't think anybody's looking around right now and being like, yeah, this is all working

really great for most Americans, we're all very happy with the outcomes that we have.

“Of course not, and so I honestly think that the question itself is sort of a, it's a defense”

of the system as it has stood and I just don't buy it. I think the fact that I have served my country, multiple combat tours, the fact that I've seen up close the actual realities of war and then struggle afterwards with not just the trauma and the sort of, the challenges that come with that, but also coming back to a society itself that had sent a lot of us off to fight in those wars.

And when we came home, it almost didn't even acknowledge that those words had happened in the first place. That's how I thought. Yeah, very much so. And going through that and then going through the frankly, like the darkness and the alienation,

the isolation that comes from it. And then getting help, getting therapy, going to the VA, moving back to my hometown, building a life in the community that I was born and raised in, reconnecting with people and rebuilding hope in that. And then at the exact same time, building a small business, growing food in the ocean for

my community, we don't sell an oyster outside of a 25 mile radius. And that whole experience, I think, to me, that makes me quite qualified to understand that policy decisions made in DC, they have real material outcomes for people. It's not theory, it's not vague, it's not just words and a page, it's not just numbers. All of this stuff has a material reality for regular people in this country.

One that I have seen up close and personal and seen the outcomes of. And I think that makes me very qualified to go up into that place of power and make sure

that when policy is crafted, we are always keeping in the forefront of our minds.

What is this going to do to regular everyday Americans? What is the material outcome of this? Because I think that the people who are quote-unquote qualified for quite some time, they've

“completely forgotten, that that's what they should actually be thinking about.”

That's why we are on the streets we are today. Your detractors would say, oh, he's not a real working man, you know, he came from money. These are the things that are being done by him. He's just cost-playing working man. Yeah, I'm really sure.

Well, I mean, I started raking blueberries when I was nine. I had my first W2 job before I even went to high school. I bag groceries and push carts did landscaping and then worked on the Appulation Trail for the MC on the professional trail crew. Those were all jobs that require you to work and use your hands after that.

I joined the infantry where I spent my 20s engaged in combat operations for this country at struggled afterwards and eventually came back to Maine where I have become a diver and an oyster farmer. My wife and I combined, make about $60,000 a year. You do get help from your family here in there.

This is really hard to say, oh, your father's a lawyer, your grandmother's a story to architect. For the record, my father is a small town lawyer in Ellsworth, Maine, who did bankruptcy in real estate law for his career in Ellsworth. Yeah.

Yeah. Not a billionaire. Most certainly not. My mother, by the way, still works. She still runs her restaurant because in her 70s, she has no retirement.

So she's going to work for the foreseeable future because she's got no way to retire. I mean, to me, if that's your definition of being like a wealthy rich person, then I think

And you have talked about your wider definition of what the working class of the United

States is. That's very simple. If the bulk of the money that you get to live comes from wages, comes from working, and you are not just sitting on an immense amount of hoarded wealth, which generates income for you, then you work for a living.

And if you sit on a bunch of hoarded wealth that generates revenue for you, you don't because you literally don't. So for me, it's fairly simple. In an age of immense wealth inequality, that's the definition that we need because they're going to try to pit us all against each other.

They're going to try to pit poor people, the people who are sitting on a immense afforded wealth that generates revenue for them, billionaires, CEOs of corporations, hedge fund managers, managers, private equity. That's who. Because they don't want us recognizing that if we band together and build political power,

we haven't within our power to pull all that stolen money back. We haven't our power to have a tax code that doesn't for right now, as we have now. We tax wages at a higher rate than we tax wealth. That's a math equation you can run to the end and see who wins out. None of this is actually all that complicated.

Those people and the established politicians that they have paid off for decades to represent their interests, they don't want us recognizing that down here in the real world, we all have everything in common. When hospitals close, that impacts Republican or Democrat alike. If young people are fleeing your community because there is no housing to buy, and there's

no future and no work, it doesn't matter if you identify as a progressive or a conservative. Your community is dying. And it's dying because people have made policy decisions to create this outcome.

“It's important for people to know the world that we live in right now, it isn't natural.”

One of this is organic. We live in the outcome of policy policies that have been implemented really for the last 40 years by establishing politicians at the behest of those who donated the most money to them. And the fascinating thing is everybody knows, everybody knows that. Say that to the average American and they're going to not at you because they know that

their political system is bought off by people with money. If those of us who are not benefiting from that system, those of us who are not seeing our lives get easier, who are not seeing our wealth increasing, who are seeing our community suffer, that's the working class. Those are all the people who are being taken advantage of in a system that is not representing

their interests and for the people who are benefiting immensely. They're the ones who we are already against. They're the ones who are going to use politics to protect their interests. They're the ones that need us being on mad at each other down here, yelling at each other about being a Republican or a Democrat or left or right because they don't want

us recognizing that there's only one direction we need to be pointing fingers and that is up. It's not left and right. So you've been clear, you want to raise taxes on the Uber wealthy in this country. Jeff Bezos, fourth wealthiest man in the world says that's not going to work.

It's not going to close the income inequality gap.

“What you should do is zero out taxes for the bottom half of American earners.”

What's your reaction to that suggestion? I love the idea that he's like, yeah, we should zero out taxes for the bottom and not raise my taxes. Like Jeff, if we're going to zero it out, by the way, I like that idea. I love the idea of raising taxes immensely on the high on billionaires and they're well.

And it's also important to remember. But do you like the idea of the zero, sorry, I'm confused about which part you like? I like the idea of if we can make a society in which people don't have to pay in taxes that are, it's going to make them poorer at a level in which that kind of, like for instance.

There's a proposal, which I think is a really good one, which is that we should never

tax someone into poverty, that if you're hovering right at the poverty line, that if you have to pay taxes and that now puts you below the poverty line, we shouldn't do that. I agree, I think that's a very, very good and fair idea. We should also still raise taxes on billionaires and corporations. That's how we're going to pull the money back.

But it's important to remember, Bezos wants us to think that he's like, look, if you just raise my individual taxes, that money right there isn't going to pay for all the things that you want. Sure, Jeff, that's right, that's why we're not raising it just on you. We're raising it on all 930 billionaires in the United States.

“That's why we're also not just going after your income, but I think we have to go after”

the wealth as well, the wealth that they sit on, the wealth that they never actually bring

So they never pay capital gains on it.

But they borrow against it happily so they can have liquidity to go through their lives. Of course, Jeff Bezos is going to tell us that if we raise his taxes, things won't get better. He doesn't want us to raise his taxes. He's a greedy person.

I mean, that makes perfect sense to me that he would say that. He's just entirely wrong in self-serving. I've met voters who are really excited about you. And I've met voters who are cautious because they've been burned before, right? They say, he says this thing, it sounds good.

But how can I trust that he'll get to DC because outsiders have gone before and actually do something different rather than let DC change him? Partially, that's why we are so focused on movement building. It's why I'm so focused on building these like coalitions with labor and with community

groups because as we build power that way, from the ground up, as we build a powerful

broad-based coalition, that is going to be able to keep pressure, not just on other representatives, but also on myself. I mean, in some way, we are building in the fail safe here. We are trying because we're not, I am not, I don't even, frankly, believe in the concept of elected leaders.

I believe in elected representatives. That is your job as to represent people, it's not to lead them. It's to represent their interests and to listen to them, it'd be accessible to them.

“And I think the best way that we do that is right now between now and November, we build”

a broad-based coalition, the state of Maine, where after I win, it cannot go away. It needs to remain because winning the Senate seat back from Susan Collins is just the beginning. I mean, the fights we have to come, getting money out of politics, term limits, making sure that we don't have politicians who enrich themselves while in office, pulling back war powers

from the executive back into the hands of Congress, which is constitutionally where it's supposed to be, changing our tax code, things like a universal healthcare system, universal child care, using the resources of our society to uplift all of us instead of just enriching a few. That is going to be a long slog.

And the power we're going to need to do it, it's not going to come from one politician. It's not going to come from one Senator or one Congress person. It's going to require the involvement of tens of thousands of mayors, millions of Americans. That's what we're building, and we're not trying to control it. We're trying to build it because that's what we're going to need down the road.

Before you can do any of that, as you mentioned, you'll have to beat Senator Susan Collins. In combat, voters have chosen her five times. She served for nearly 30 years. That's right. She's been there for 30 years.

But she keeps getting chosen. So what makes this moment different? What makes you think you can beat her? Oh, because we're just not playing their game.

“It's important to remember that up until now, the campaigns that have generally been”

run against Susan Collins have been directed from Washington DC. They've been involved in national party in many ways. That's where they've been directed. That's where they choose the candidates. I mean, as everybody probably has noticed, I was not the chosen candidate of the party in Washington

DC. And still many skeptics within the party about you right now. They don't like me at all. Well, they don't like, of course, they don't like me, because I'm trying to build a completely different kind of party.

I'm the one that they then they want.

I mean, they want to continue being powerful, personally.

They want to continue to keep this political industrial complex going where everybody gets to make all of this money. It's utterly, utterly disgusting, and insane. So of course, they don't want to see this kind of politics. But we don't care.

We just beat them, by the way. And we're going to beat them again. And we're going to keep beating them until we take this country back for work and folks.

“The way that-- but that kind of politics, that's what's been waged against Susan Collins.”

And I just don't think you can play the same playbook that she's going to use. I don't think you can use the same political kind of structures that they're going to use. This whole idea that all you do is you raise tons and tons of money, generally from corporations, superpacks, from lots and lots of wealthy people. You raise all that money, and then you blow it all on a bunch of TV ads in which you don't

talk about policy. You don't talk about the future. All you do is attack each other. You just use negative things. You go after people's character.

You go after people's personal lives, which, by the way, is exactly what we're saying right now. Because they don't want to talk about policy. They don't want to talk about the fact that Susan Collins has been there for 30 years. And in those 30 years, everything got harder down here.

30 years. She's chair of appropriations. She likes to tell us all that she has this immense amount of power.

Why then is housing becoming entirely unaffordable for younger folks in the state?

“Why are we seeing the actual collapse of our rural health care system right now?”

She has been a charge for 30 years. And she has overseen a system that has brought us to the brink of collapse. You talk about the culture of attacking. And right now, I mean, those who are criticizing you are going after your history, right? Online, read a post that have been deleted, but did say racist things, did sort of blame

the victim for sexual assault. And then you yourself revealed a tattoo on, oh, go ahead. We have talked about the read a post in Sector. Right. Everybody in Maine knows about it.

And they've also come up with pretty much all your town halls, right? No, I talk about it. And I talk about it very publicly. I'm curious why, you know, frankly, when those posts first came to light, a lot of people were like, his political aspirations are dead.

This campaign is over. Well, what they understand, they don't really have political aspirations. I mean, I didn't get into this because I want to be a politician.

“I got into this because I believe in building a different kind of politics for working.”

So I guess what my question is, is why you think voters chose to either forgive you for those posts or look the other way? Well, I think it's mostly forgiveness.

I mean, because when I explained it, I just pointed out that, look, I've not always been

who I am today. I mean, I was a young man who spent the bulk of my 20s being intense combat zones. I grew up in the infantry. And that was my lived experience. I left that world with many of the kind of cultural, I would say, elements that come out

of it. I mean, the infantry is a place of hypermasculinity, it's a place of intense violence. These are the scenes of virtues there, are generally not seen as virtues in the normal world. And then I had to struggle with how do I come out of that and integrate back into society. And I talked about that journey.

I talked about it very, very honestly. And I think a lot of people recognize that the ability to transform the ability to change

is kind of just a normal human trait.

I mean, I don't think there are a lot of Americans that want the world to think that everything they ever said when they were 25 is who they are forever.

“And I don't think anybody believes that's how people work.”

So that's why. I mean, I think as I went around the state of Maine and I talked about it publicly, I talked about it with everybody who would listen. And I would answer every question that came up with it. And ironically, we don't really talk about it much here in Maine anymore.

The only time it ever comes up is when journalists come in from the outside or when I leave Maine, then people want to talk about it. But it also comes up with your own party. I mean, just a few days ago, Congressman Jake Aschenklus said the tattoo that was once on your chest that you've now covered up that resembles a Nazi SS symbol should be disqualifying.

And he wants main voters to agree with him, meaning not choose you. Right. So I guess he wants to choose. It's an interesting choice for a Democrat. So I'm not actually all that worried about what he thinks.

Also, what's disqualifying for the record is the fact that Susan Collins has not represented the people of Maine. The fact that we are seeing our healthcare system collapse in the state. That's disqualifying. You know, look, what other people think about me, not in the state of Maine, what established

my Democrats think about me, that's that's their business. It's very clear that you're in the state of Maine, the voters really do understand that I am who I claim to be. I'm a very real person and warts and all and and I've talked about it and I will continue to talk about it and they seem to yeah, if people, if people in the Democratic party in other

states don't like me, that's not really my problem. The one thing that I heard from regular people who were trying to figure out whether they believed you specifically about this tattoo, because you said, I didn't know what it was. Like I put a skull and bones on my chest from 2007, but you've also described yourself as a military history buff and their question is, how did he not know if he is a military

history buff? Because that motif I have seen on French Foreign Legion units, I have seen it on US special forces odias, I've seen on other Marines, it's a that skulls and cross bones of a myriad of kind of kind of versions are for fairly obvious reasons, incredibly popular in combat units throughout history.

So it's a that's why and for the record, I reenlist in the United States Army.

I worked for the State Department at a top secret clearance.

I was on the ambassador to Afghanistan security team where I was screened for gang and hate tattoos. I do get a chuckle out of the fact that suddenly everyone has an expert on this version of skull and cross bones, but for 17 years of my life, including getting screened for tattoos never once came up.

There's a certain public persona you have, right? Like you're an oyster farmer.

“You've got sleeve tattoos, you're not the prototype, the DC prototype, right?”

And you just, you represent masculinity in certain ways, the Dem McCrads have trouble connecting

with male voters, describe the masculinity that you represent.

I think it's just a healthy form of it, which is, yeah, look, I mean, I lift weights. I shoot guns, my background is obviously in the military. I work outside, most of my hobbies are things that people tend to associate with like manly stuff, I guess. The exact same time I go to therapy.

I have a very open sort of dialogue and emotional relationship with my wife. I am, I work incredibly hard to put myself in places where I share space with folks who have very different outlooks or backgrounds as me. And then open up to the idea that their lived experience is exactly as valid as mine. And in that kind of thing throughout my life has really been the most educational thing

that's ever happened to me. Even on this campaign, I mean, I have interacted with more people in the past nine months than I think I might have interacted with my entire life beforehand. That is educational. When you are willing to be open and accepting, when you're willing to not just immediately

get defensive about things and understand that like, you may have preconceived notions. You may have ways of speaking, you may have ideas that when you interact with other folks, they inform you that either you're wrong or maybe what you're saying is hurtful and harmful. And then instead of getting angry about it, you understand it and you engage. What I think is incredibly manly, the idea to be open, the idea to be vulnerable.

We have this concept of masculinity in which, especially right now with all this kind of manosphere and nonsense, this idea that you're supposed to use your strengths to use power over other people or to offend people, be mean to people, that somehow that's manly. That's not, that's the act of a coward.

“And I think it's important, it's important, I mean, I don't know how to talk about this”

because it's going to sound like I'm saying I do this on purpose but I don't. But like it is important to like have people who can show that you look, you can be a tattooed, deep voice combat veteran who makes a living on the sea and also go to therapy and think that it is a virtue to show up for your neighbors and care about other people. In fact, I think those two things go completely hand in hand, they aren't separate.

But we do have this vision of masculinity in our society right now, which kind of makes one seem like if you're this way you're supposed to be like hardened and shut off from the world and angry. And oh god, yeah, I mean, that was, when I was, when I kind of is my darkest moments after my military service, I mean, I was extremely isolated, I was very alone, I did not feel

connected to people. I was emotionally just fully unavailable. I mean, I didn't even, and I felt that like if I opened up to people if people saw my weaknesses, they would

“like judge me for it and so the best thing to do is kind of put on this sort of tough guy”

persona. And that was the unhappiest I've ever been. I've never been more lonely. I've never

been more unfulfilled. And it was only after moving back to my home pound quite honestly, being very engaged in my community. And then being willing to start like opening up to people and making myself vulnerable, that resulted in a level of fulfillment and happiness that I never could have imagined. And that really got me to where I've been for the past few years, which has been living a very, very pleasant life.

You have a generation of men like you, whose formative experiences were at war in US wars. Among them also, Pete Heggseth, Secretary of Defense. You were both shaped by these wars, but you sort of channeled that in very different. Secretary Heggseth and I also have very different backgrounds and combat. So I'll just leave it at that.

Why do you think that you're so different in your approach to politics?

of building movement politics again in this country. I believe that the legacies of things

like the women's suffrage movement, the labor movement of the civil rights movement, that is to me the blueprint for what we need to be doing now, really kind of re-engaging people in a small, d-democratic fashion, not something that's controlled from above, but something that really pushes power down and allows people to organize and build that power together.

“That's the core of my politics. That's what this campaign is. It's not a tactic for me.”

This isn't like, I'm not like, oh, we'll do this, and this is the best way to win electorally. This is my politics. What we are doing in bodies what I believe and what I think we have to be. The policies I put out, I'm not putting them out because we focus group tested them. People aren't idiots. People know what's going on. When Americans look around and see everything getting harder and they also see Elon Musk on his way

to being the first trillionaire, when people see collapsing housing markets, but also recognize

the private equities allowed to buy up single family homes in this country, people see it. They understand it. They grasp that their health care is a mess because it is structured right now to prioritize profit over providing health care. And we've just come along with a campaign that essentially just sets that. Just says it all right out loud and is also based on the fact that this is these are my politics. I'm running on my politics. I'm not

looking for a politics to get me elected. You know that feeling when you hear a great tip, and it's like, that makes so much sense. Why haven't I been doing that all this time? If that's you, you might like life kit. Whether you're looking to make changes around your health, your money, your relationships, your parenting, your guaranteed the, this is so helpful feeling. Listen to the life kit podcast

in the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. Has your party now that you're the presumptive nominee changed towards you? No, because the control of Congress can get part runs through this state, through your race. Any road to a blue Senate pretty much goes through the state of mind. There are very few paths available if we don't beat Susan Collins. I would say that there is a, there is a slight shifting

at the moment. It hasn't been substantial. After the governor dropped out, I received phone calls from Chuck Schumer. Pushed her to Ron again. Pushed her run, and he can graduate at me on a well run race. We talked about how beating Susan Collins is the

“priority and agreed that that's what we have to be focused on. Certainly, I've gotten”

more reach out from individual senators, Democratic senators who had not heard from before. Here in the state of mind, the state party, which we have a good relationship with, we're all excited to go, you know, do this together. But at the national level, I mean, there's still, in one, like, my criticisms of the party don't change just because we want. In fact, in many ways, it just shows that our criticisms were correct. As in new leadership, new leadership,

and, but also like a new way of doing politics. I mean, in many ways, we did just beat the Democratic establishment. And we did it with a candidate that nobody had ever heard of before August of last year. And that I think is, is a data point that their version of politics really doesn't meet the moment at all. And that what we're doing, which is totally different and focused far more on people and engaging people, not trying to dictate

to them. This is the politics of the future. I want to talk about the war in Iran. I mean, you talk a lot about the way that serving broke you. You've been in Taiwan, even before you signed up, which is curious. Why did you sign up? Because I wanted to serve my country.

Yeah, which is different than I don't. I've always found it strange that people can't

comprehend that you can criticize the behavior of your government while also still loving

“your country. But it isn't a difference to, like, you're going into politics, right?”

But going into the military means that in moments, politicians make decisions, whether you agree with them or not, you will have to pick up a gun. You will have to maybe die, maybe kill. So I guess that's for people who don't necessarily channel that way. That's

Corps infantry. But there is a subset of young Americans who do see their best path to service

“as through something like the Marine Corps infantry. And I was one of those young Americans.”

You've been very opposed to the Iran war. Yes. What would you be doing right now if you were in Senate in the Senate? Because a lot of your party has expressed at least concern or. But if you were in Senate in the Senate right now, what would you be doing as an opponent to this world? We're blocking every bit of funding possible. We shouldn't send a single dollar for any of this nonsense. I would absolutely be at me. And it's hard to say this because

people often, like, if you were in the Senate, I mean, if I was in the Senate, we might

have a democratic majority, which means it totally is, I mean, it's, it's what we do

think. Oh, we honest, it's a, it's a hypothetical that is kind of hard to actually play out. But, um, but I would be a very vocal voice like Chris Van Hollen has been against

“the war. I would absolutely be working with all the other democratic senators who are”

trying to stop this thing and working with some of hopefully the Republican senators like Rand Paul, who are also opposed to this kind of this military adventurous. You know, somebody who sees serving the country is joining the U.S. military, what do you think the U.S. military's role in the world should be? I mean, we hear from Secretary

Hegseff, a particular view, right? Of warriors who pursue, quote, maximum, lethality.

What do you see the U.S. military's role in the future to be? What should it be? Defending the United States and the interests of the American people. And right now, I do not see how the war in Iran is doing either of those things at all. Now, it's making some people very rich, which tends to be what war does in our society, some other reasons why, well,

“I'm not a pacifist. I've absolutely become essentially anti war, because far before Donald”

Trump, I mean, I fought in two wars that when I look back on them, didn't really seem to have much point. They came, they went, there was an immense amount of suffering, there was a immense amount of violence, there was an immense amount of sacrifice, and we contributed to the destruction of nations and the emiseration of whole populations. Some people got very rich off of that, and some people were able to use it as a political tool to protect their

political interests. But the people who got rich weren't in the infantry, and the people who benefited from it politically were not the average American. We spent, it looks like in the end, it's going to be somewhere around $8 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. For nothing, $8 trillion added to the national debt, which is already gigantic, $8 trillion for nothing, just a bucket of blood that we just dumped cash into for 20 straight years.

That is not making America safer. That is not protecting the interests of the average American. That is using militarism and war as a excuse for people to make profit, and for people in power to try to protect themselves, select poorly, to try to use things like nationalism and patriotism to wrap themselves in the flag so they don't have to talk about the fact that their domestic policies are garbage and are not helping the average person.

I just don't have any patience for it. The United States military, the willingness of young Americans to sign the dotted line, and in many ways sacrifice their lives for this country to defend their fellow Americans to protect the Constitution. That is a national resource that must be jealously guarded. That is not something to be squandered, so some politician can protect their political future or some rathion executive can buy another

yacht. That is not what that is for, and yet for a very long time, primarily because Congress is abdicated its constitutional responsibility around warmaking. We have seen the U.S. military use for exactly those purposes, and as someone who had to see all of that close up and close and personal for someone who frankly still has to deal with the fact that I know what it looks like when American-made high explosives interact with children. It is an awful thing.

It is not a thing that you just leave behind, stays with you the rest of your life. Knowing that I went through those experiences, because people in political power simply see war as a game or a tool, Pete Hegseth is literally using the U.S. military to make up for the fact that he is insecure about his own military service. That is insane, but he has power, and that is

guard major. I mean, no shade to the national guard at all. I was in the national guard, but his

“combat record doesn't look like the combat record of a lot of other people, and I think that bothers him.”

Steep down inside, it makes him insecure, and so now he gets the posture. And he gets the

literally start wars so he can pretend that he is this big tough guy. Never want to range

your school. So, you know, not sure how tough he actually is. We were in Iraq, I think around the same time, and I've also seen obviously war up close. When you think about your opposition right now, do you see Iran, the war on Iran, in the same way? Is this the same kind of war? Same kind of war. Same kind of war. And it's a war, and the reason I say it's the same kind of war, is that it's a, it is the outcome of politicians who think war is flippant,

who think that war is just a little toy they get to play around with in order to kind of help themselves in whatever way possible. Iraq was that. It was that in a way that like the Bush administration got to enrich a lot of other people, got to kind of use the sort of the post-9/11 field of patriotism to go start that war based on lies that people in the Bush White House have been trying to start for years. They used it. They used it because they can it because they,

“and I see that exactly, that's exactly what we have here. And that's by the way, that's what”

that's what it was when we were dropping bombs on fishing boats in the Caribbean last fall. That's what going into Venezuela and kidnapping a foreign head of state was. This is people who have access to immense amounts of power, who think that all of this is a game. It's a game that they can use to help themselves politically or enrich themselves and their friends. That's how they see it. And the burden of it is going to fall on the young American

men and women who are sent over to fight it and the civilian populations and the nations that we start these wars. And that's who bears it. And I think that this one Iran is exactly the same. Everyone's like, "Oh, we're almost to a peace deal in which we reopen the straits of war moves." And it's like, "Oh, you mean what we had before the war started?" You're going to tell

me that we just spent $50 billion, $13 dead Americans, thousands of dead people, gas prices,

soaring a possible collapse of fertilizer industries just to get back to where we were. That seems like a pretty stupid use of military force to me. Another thing critics have brought up is your VA benefits in the sense that they say, "How does he qualify 100% when he's oyster farming and he's running a Strenuous campaign?" If you could just walk me through the benefits that you

“receive and and you should talk to the VA, they'll tell you how the process works.”

That's what you say to veterans who've had trouble accessing the benefits you've been able to you. What I say is that one of the things I really want to work on in the Senate is building an army of social workers for the VA to go out into this country and find every single veteran who is not getting the benefits that they earned. Because one of the biggest problems is, and I have friends like this, very clever, I just was hanging out with one last week,

friends who because of struggles in life have not been able to access benefits, which is ironic, because the whole point of benefits is to help with the struggles. You know, when people are in the whole, when they are really having a hard time making it work, when you go up, turn in a piece of paperwork and they say, "Oh, you filled out the wrong form 47-Elfa, you're supposed to fill out 47-Bravo, you don't go back and do that. You think this system doesn't care about me because I'm already

depressed in angry and then you continue suffering. That needs to end." The, the, I have found that VA healthcare for me has been incredibly life-changing. The process to get it was still a total

pain in the ass. I mean, I, I think I filed my first claim in 2013, and it wasn't until the early

2020s that the VA finally gave me my final rating. That's a long, long time. For many of those years, I didn't even have anything. And, and those were the years in which I struggled the most, because I didn't have access to that support. I mean, that was when I was struggling. So, what I would say to those vets is, helps on the way. I mean, I very much want to go up into US Senate and be a strong voice for making sure that not only do we expand VA benefits, not only do we protect it from the likes of

Donald Trump and Doge, who are just trying to cut money, left and right, and just strip these systems

benefits that they aren't. I read that your high school superlative was most likely to start a revolution.

“Yes. Is this run for Senate? Is this your revolution? Yeah, I believe in the need for political”

revolution in this country. And I think a lot of people do. The problem that we have right now is that the political system as it stands is what got us here. It's what is built this reality. We need a more democratic society. We need to end partisan gerrymandering. We need to get money out of politics. If I have my way, elections will be publicly funded, and they will last two months, and there will be no consulting class. There will be no ad firms. Everybody gets the same pot of money. Get your

signatures, get other countries do this, by the way. None of this is crazy. But it's revolutionary in America right now, because that is so far away from what our politics has become. We advocated at the beginning of this nation for something different, for something more democratic. A government that was actually going to represent the people themselves. That was the revolutionary promise

that started America. We've never fulfilled it. We have moved slightly towards it at times,

sometimes we take steps back, sometimes we take great leaps forward. But we are still on the path of fulfilling that revolutionary promise in which my favorite founding father, Thomas Payne, said in common sense in 1776. We have it in our power to make the world over again. We still have in our power. That is a revolutionary concept. And a future in which politics is not for the rich, not for the powerful, but politics is truly democratic. It is accessible to the average American.

“It is something that someone like me down the road, I want people to say like, you know what?”

I want to represent my community. I care about people around me. I want to go serve my time as a representative, that they can go do it, because right now, if the average person has that thought, if they don't have access to money or, in my case, the luck of support from labor unions,

then that's it. It's never going to happen. Building that future, that is revolutionary. And I think

that's exactly the kind of future that people want in this country. Presumptive democratic nominee Graham Platner. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. I really appreciate it. Before we go or reminder that new episodes of newsmakers drop as soon as they're available,

“we share them here on up first when we can. But the best way to stay caught up is to follow or”

subscribe to the show on Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you watch or listen to podcasts. Of course,

you can also find it in the NPR app. And remember, newsmakers like up first, relies on supporters

who value independent journalism and a free press. Join NPR plus today to support our work and get perks from the podcast, you trust, go to plus.npr.org. I'm Leyla Faussin. Thanks for listening to up first from NPR News. Hi, it's Mary Louise Kelly. My podcast sources and methods is one of the top rated national security shows on Apple, average rating 4.9 out of 5. We're one of the best for a reason. Of course, abundance around the world, veteran journalists,

trusted analysis and on the ground reporting. To understand war, geopolitics and are changing world. Listen to sources and methods from NPR.