It's not like it's a swastika, it was a skull and crossbones that turns out to have been used by the SS (I think?). I had no idea that particular image was nazi-related and I don't think most other people would have either. As far as "mistakes made by marines on shore leave" go it's pretty mild. Honestly his more recent scandals are more concerning as far as character.
Platner's upside is being a senator that's not from the student senate -> Hill staffer -> party insider pipeline. We're all pretty much sick of that character, he sounds much more authentic by comparison.
It's an extremely well known nazi symbol. Probably second behind the swastika itself. There's even that famous "are we the baddies" meme, which uses that symbol as a central pillar of the gag.
I'm pretty online, I've seen that skit and I to this day don't really know what a totenkopf looks like. I'd never heard the word before this Platner business either. Surprising you're saying it's well-known. Am I in some kind of bubble?
Hmm I don't know. Other comments are suggesting that unless you're well studied in nazi symbolism you'd never know. I think I learnt about this in high school history class. I wonder if there's a European/American divide on this topic (I am European)
I think it is probably useful for people to familiarise themselves with Nazi symbolism though. You would be surprised how often you encounter people online using these obscure symbols, knowing most people won't recognise them.
Hard for me to judge your bubble-ness, as I'm in a different bubble of ....I dunno, a recovered former Wehraboo? Those people who "study WW2" mostly to edge themselves about how militarily successful the Nazis were. I include a large part of the US military officer corps in this category, where quoting dead German generals is normalized. I had a copy of "The Cruel Hunters"[1] before I left high school back in 2001, so of course I know what a totenkopf is, and it's shocking to me that most people don't.
EDIT: And if I had to pick a Nazi symbol I think most people don't recognize, I'd go with the Black Sun.[2]
Really I have show it to several people and asked them what it was. Not one identified it as a nazi tattoo. To make such a bold claim it’s extremely well known is an exaggeration at best. What matters most is do you believe he has a nazi ideology? If the answer is no then I think it’s just a stupid debate to begin with.
If the bones are a little longer, it's a Jolly Roger. If the teeth were longer, it would be a punisher skull. If it weren't turned at that particular angle it would just be a generic skull. If it were 2 angular lightning bolts, it would obviously be SS but a skull is really common in a lot of contexts.
If you happened to clock this particular skull shape as a symbol from an SS division, then congrats, but 95% of people just would not and that's why it didn't land as a scandal. Everyone said "Huh. I didn't know either." and then accepted "Marine gets dumb skull tattoo while drunk on shore leave" as a fairly normal thing to have happened.
If I had wheels I’d be a bicycle. I don’t see your point? It’s very obvious what it is and just because you can alter an icon to make it look like something else doesn’t change what it is.
Ignorance of something doesn’t change what it is. “Oops I accidentally had a Nazi for nearly 20 years and only had it covered up 9 months ago when it became a political liability” isn’t a good look to say the least.
My point is that it's not very obvious what it is unless you are super studied in Nazi symbology. I thought I was clear but there it is in case I wasn't.
If this were a swastika, the SS lightning bolts or even the Iron Cross, yeah, that looks pretty Nazi. Instead it's a skull and crossbones just like every other one used all over the place, including the very cool jolly roger, except this one happens to be Nazi. I didn't know, most people didn't know, he can credibly say he didn't know, and we all think the jolly roger's cool. Dog's not gonna hunt.
I am not super studied in nazi symbology. I learnt about this symbol in high school history class btw.
It is not a regular skull and crossbones anymore than the iron cross (which you identify as nazi symbolism) is a regular cross. It's strange to insist on the former, while distinguishing the latter as obviously nazi.
“My point is that it's not very obvious what it is unless you are super studied in Nazi symbology”
Or if you ever played a WWII themed video game (Wolfenstein, Call of Duty), or if you’ve ever watched a WWII show like Band of Brothers or watched a major WWII movie like Schindlers List or Saving Private Ryan. I could go on, it’s prominent in nearly any WWII media.
Honestly, I don’t know if people toting the line saying it’s “obscure” are intentionally lying because he aligns with their political agenda or are completely oblivious to any level of detail in any media.
Not sure what to tell you--I like many others here it seems (and probably elsewhere) hadn't even heard of a totenkopf before this issue was raised. It's a non-issue. Honestly I think it's a bit strange that you think it's so recognizable.
Bro, I am not lying, there are skulls and crossbones from so many sources. I saw all those movies, I knew some Nazi units used skulls just like units of many militaries, pirates, motorcycle gangs etc. It's a cross-cultural symbol for "we fuck shit up".
If you examined so much Nazi symbology that you would immediately flag this as a particularly Nazi skull based on the angle and bone length, you are the unusual one. It's cool to have interests but understand that the rest of us just see a skull and don't have nearly the response we would to a swastika.
You do realize there are many people, especially younger folk, who will never have played or seen the media listed? And if they did not even noticed the symbol?
I’m older and have and I didn’t even know there was a special Nazi skull symbol while I do know about many of their other symbols.
Because it demonstrates it’s not some obscure piece of history that only WWII buffs would know.
A major film with one of the most acclaimed directors of all time that won the highest award you can win as a movie had the icon featured prominently on the main villain’s uniform throughout the nearly 4 hour movie. Come on my guy.
Definitely not. SS bolts, the nazi eagle, the iron cross, the fasces, hitler's mustache, etc are all immensely more recognizeable.
The fact that in the skit they say "we've got skulls on our caps" rather than referring to the actual symbol or even accurately describing it tells you the lack of general familiarity. We all know Nazi's had skulls on their caps, no one knows there are even crossed bones there, nonetheless the particular styling. Normal people don't closely examine Nazi uniforms. Further, this is a comedy sketch playing up the absurdity of the situation for laughs; in reality it was not a Nazi symbol of how evil they were, it was a symbol that had been used in the Prussian and other German armies for centuries and then the Stormtroopers of WW1. In the interwar period it was used by the Freikorps and eventually by the SS, trying to invoke that same imagery. It has become a hate symbol well known amongst white supremacists, but not the general population.
Not an American here, but I too never knew the skull and bones symbol is somehow associated with the Nazis. So I would disagree that it is "extremely well known".
The ADL is not a trustworthy source about what is and isn't anti-Semitism. Maybe they do point out actual incidents of anti-Semitism and true anti-Semites (which still exist in large numbers.) but they're unflinching support for Israel (a leading world cause of anti-Semitism) calls all their messaging into question.
When they go the other way and say something is not a nazi salute, that is pretty trustworthy. Especially of someone who they are quite critical of for other reasons.
Much more trustworthy than some internet crackpot conspiracy theorist, or the "trust me bro" people and groups whose political alignments compel them to also claim that Corey Booker's "nazi salute" wasn't, or that this guy's nazi tattoo is not a big deal, wouldn't you think?
Of course you find them untrustworthy, because their position on Musk's salute threatens the non-negotiable tenets of your worldview. You decided it is a nazi salute, therefore anybody who disagrees is untrustworthy/Zionist/etc vast conspiracy theory. This is not surprising at all, I'm not trying to change your opinion because it clearly can't be.
I'm just commenting that people who are absolutely certain about that (without much evidence other than "trust me bro"), but simultaneously vigorously defend nazi tattoos and similar salutes from people who they like, are incapable of reasoning about this subject. The ADL might have other issues which you are desperately trying to conflate here, but clearly they are recognized experts in this, at least to the point you'd be inclined to believe them over politicians or frothing internet partisans on the matter. Right?
Whatever that performance was, it certainly was not a debunking. The guy made a Nazi salute at CPAC, I saw it, there wasn't any ambiguity or question of intent. To me and everyone I know it was an obvious overt Nazi salute made in a context where it was clear that's what he was doing, esp. to me and my Jewish family members. The fact that the ADL stooped to what they did doesn't change reality, it just shows what a bunch of ghouls the ADL have become. Other Jewish orgs have been clear that this was a Nazi salute.
I have not heard anybody who is assured that it was a nazi salute after "doing their own research on the internet" who did not already hate Musk and wish desperately for this to be a nazi salute. The evidence for this conclusion that I have seen boils down to "Musk is a nazi therefore this was a nazi salute", because somehow the exact same kind of actions can be deemed with certainty to not be nazi salutes when performed by figures these self-enlightened people like. So you will forgive me for not trusting frothing "internet researchers" at their word, over organizations like the ADL.
Well this has been a fascinating case study in how rapidly expert opinion is cast aside and to make way for conspiracy theories about the scheming Jews when it suits peoples biases, so let's just end the thread at that.
I just mentioned the ADL saying it wasn't. Are you asserting without evidence that they are "Musk stan" anti-semites, or are you pretending this is too complicated for you to follow?
I am asserting they are Zionist (not anti-Semitic) to the point of denying that Musk’s “heil hitler” salute isn’t that. BTW—Being Zionist and against hatred of Jews is not compatible.
Pretending the ADL is some neutral apolitical research body of experts on antisemitism is absolutely ridiculous in 2026. Come on. They aren't any more a useful source on this then saying "the Republican Party cleared it" or "the CPAC secretariat cleared it".
This is the same org that defined antisemitism as being equivalent to criticising the State of Israel. They have zero credibility on the subject.
Also, it wasn't "the ADLs research wing did a comprehensive study and concluded it was not a Nazi salute". It was a tweet made solely by the CEO of the ADL, who has himself been criticised for turning away from civil rights and antisemitism and focusing on Israeli interests.
I'm not pretending anything other than the ADL has a lot more authority than the incoherent rambling of partisans and conspiracy theorists who think they know it all. Clearly people who think Corey Booker's exact same actions, or this hateful weirdo's nazi tattoo are "no big deal" a just hilariously contradictory if they claim to be certain that Musk made a "nazi salute"! If nothing else we can agree on that and laugh at those hateful cretins.
> Also, it wasn't "the ADLs research wing did a comprehensive study and concluded it was not a Nazi salute". It was a tweet made solely by the CEO of the ADL, who has himself been criticised for turning away from civil rights and antisemitism and focusing on Israeli interests.
Disingenuous. That is the official stance of the ADL and the tweet was made on behalf of the organization.
The ADL is much more concerned with Israeli settlers than they are with American Jews at this point and they've proved it repeatedly.
They don't care at all when republicans are admiring hitler in their group chats because they're reliable votes for Israel. Meanwhile, liberals who believe firmly in equality are in the cross-hairs because that equality includes arabs as well as jews.
Also, serious question, you're going after Cory Booker as anti-Israel? My information had him as pretty tied up with AIPAC, can you elaborate?
> The ADL is much more concerned with Israeli settlers than they are with American Jews at this point and they've proved it repeatedly.
> They don't care at all when republicans are admiring hitler in their group chats because they're reliable votes for Israel. Meanwhile, liberals who believe firmly in equality are in the cross-hairs because that equality includes arabs as well as jews.
None of that addresses what I wrote about them and it does not refute that they have a credible position to talk about nazi symbolism.
> Also, serious question, you're going after Cory Booker as anti-Israel? My information had him as pretty tied up with AIPAC, can you elaborate?
You're getting wildly defensive and lashing out without understanding the conversation. I'm not going after Cory Booker at all, because I don't think he made a nazi salute that kind of thing would just be an utterly idiotic claim to make. I brought him up because it's a good example about people who have biases will call two practically identical actions totally different based on who is doing them.
I really don't give a rat's ass what your twisted hateful little denier mind does, except I suppose for morbid fascination to know what "world view" it is you believe that i am "pushing".
I'm sure he figured it out at some point and should have had it covered up sooner, but I doubt he knew what it was when he got it.
Honestly, I'd be more concerned with someone who knows too much Nazi minutiae rather than too little.
EDIT: reading the CNN story, I'm actually less convinced, this is all coming from a conservative activist ex-girlfriend. Its a really obscure symbol and then there's this quote:
"Platner argued that he had the tattoo for 17 years without anyone raising concerns about Nazi symbolism, noting that he received a State Department security clearance, reenlisted in the Army after being screened for gang and hate-related tattoos, and regularly appeared shirtless around family members, including Jewish relatives."
Sure, maybe. I'm doubtful. But that's irrelevant. He knew when he launched his campaign. He chose to keep it. Worse, there's a good chance his family and his staffers knew as well. This is Jill Biden covering up Joe Biden's dementia all over again, except this time for racism.
Platner is a rubbish candidate. But! There is a case to be made that he's better for America than Susan Collins.
Did you recognize that skull as a Nazi symbol without being told? Like, "Oh, that's the Totemkompf"?
Personally, like I said, I think the more recent sexting thing is way more damaging to his brand. "Got a dumb tattoo on shore leave and posted dumb reddit comments 10 years ago" are fine for an everyman candidate, recent infidelity is not.
Plenty of people recognize that as a nazi symbol. Its why he covers it up in photos but leaves other tats uncovered. We only found out because of a leaked video from a personal event and someone inside his life confirming.
> Did you recognize that skull as a Nazi symbol without being told?
Nope. But if you're sending your pics out, someone is going to come back to you with that feedback. In this case, we have someone who says they did that.
> the more recent sexting thing is way more damaging to his brand
Sure, why not. I don't think, at the end of the day, we have any evidence either is electorally relevant anymore.
For the record, and I hope this isn't too forward, I respect your honesty and understand it's gotta be tough being a liberal zionist with everything that's going on. I respect it so much more than just going full Stephen Miller which I've seen some friends do.
For the record, I rotate accounts every year or two and this account's age coincides with the age of the current Iran conflict so I probably have a disproportionate amount of comments on it.
JumpCrisscross, I wasn't trying to pigeonhole you but that was my impression based on your interaction with a number of threads over the years, my apologies if I mislabeled you, I meant it with respect.
lostlogin, thanks for the neutral reading, I appreciate you.
I think people are really past the point of caring. The limousine liberals of course make a fuss but sitting on the high horse has not really served democrats that well, just taking L after L. And the sitting president is Epstein-Mossad pedofile and huge number still stand behind him without any shame.
I would expect anybody who graduated with a 4 year degree in the US to be able to recognize a totenkopf. It's probably the third most well-known Nazi symbol, and is almost certainly present in any textbook or museum about WWII (besides being a symbol is fictional media about Nazi Germany).
However, I think this is beside the point. The more relevant questions are (1) whether Platner knew what it was, and (2) whether an informed voter should want someone who doesn't know the meaning of the things they get tattooed on their body. Authentic or not, (2) demonstrates a lack of good judgement to me.
(Separately, having been to that part of part of Slavic southern Europe, it is inconceivable that any tattoo parlor that would give you a totenkopf tattoo is not plastered in other Nazi and far-right iconography. You would need to actively look past all of the other Nazi stuff and assume that the skull is the one thing that doesn't have some additional meaning.)
Mamdani and AOC were appealing because they grew up in those communities and had a history of fighting for their communities. (AOC with her organizing efforts while she was a bartender and Mamdani as Assemblymember and him doing things like going on a hunger strike for the Taxi protests).
AOC took on a congress member that was placed into his seat, served 10 terms (and was known as the Dem party's money link to wall street) and didn't even live in the district.
Mamdani was a clean slate from the messes of the prior administrations.
Platner has many of these qualities and is also taking on candidates (both in his party and the opposition) that have repeatedly failed his community. An oyster farmer that grew up in his state, he talks a lot about his upbringing in the state. It seems like so many of his speeches incorporate how deeply ingrained he is within Maine. The community organizing that convinced him to run is probably a lot to do with his success. I remember when AOC was just starting. There were multiple community organizing groups that knew all the tricks of the Queens machine. They were able to help AOC avoid early traps laid by the establishment.
Plathner is authentic and able to see and correct his mistakes (tattoo), two important properties that candidates from the una-party lack. He is certainly not perfect, but apparently better than the rest.
If the main objection against a blackwater mercenary that talks fondly of the time where he made a living by being a murderer, is was that has a Nazi tattoo, then yes, it's quite likely that America can't find anything better.
Not being MAGA. I have some respect for Susan Collins. But this nonsense where a tattoo and infidelity should be disqualifying on one side while the President, popularly elected this time, sleeps with porn stars and endorses anti-Semites and KKK adjacents, is unsustainable. If we need a dude with a Nazi tattoo to win Maine, I guess I prefer to be pissed off and winning.
Yes, but that should be baseline for the Democrat candidate? Are there really no better candidates in Maine? This sort of thing would be regarded as disqualifiing in the UK even for local councilors from the far right. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/27/calls-barns...
Manchin was against Build Back Better, expanding voting rights legislation and codifying abortion rights.
Yes, he was better than a Republican. But he was a big reason why Democrats are seen as the do-nothing party who never achieve things. Because he stood in the way of it.
Not to mention, Fetterman isn’t Manchin. Manchin at least voted to impeach Trump, Fetterman is skeptical of even doing that.
>"Democrats are seen as the do nothing party".
Quite a few people I know [eu based] used to consider themselves 'democrats' ie not republicans.
But, more and more are co.ing to the conclusion that the dems are pretty darn useless.
Doesn’t confirm Pam Bondi and Pete Hegseth. Doesn’t confirm a new numpty to SCOTUS. Doesn’t blow the budget on a fake deportation push and tax breaks for the rich.
I agree Democrats have no agenda. But Republicans don’t seem to either right now. They have talking points. But the policy passed bears no resemblance to those in the slightest.
As if that has ever overcome the American media and political classes' fixation with bipartisanship (which is how the American system inoculates itself against left-wing policy)
Fear not: “As you can all probably tell, I got a lot of criticisms about the way this government functions. But in order for us to make it functional, we’re gonna have to do stuff,” Platner said. “And you can’t just go down there and be John Fetterman and ... just sort of be an a*hole.”
I'm not sure what the alleged benefits of Platner are either. Mamdani has been amazing, but what is Platner for?