Scandal-plagued Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner used a fiery pre-primary address to pitch universal health care, wealth taxes, a Green New Deal and other far-left agenda items, like floating an idea that billionaires should be jailed for looking at political ads «the wrong way» in remarks about campaign finance reform.

The comment about jailing billionaires earned the candidate backlash from his Republican critics, who pointed out some of Platner’s biggest endorsers are funded by billionaires, highlighted the «Marxist dystopian» nature of the remarks, and joked that Platner must have some sort of affinity for locking people up against their will, referring to recent allegations from an ex-girlfriend.

«We need to get money out of politics. We need to get rid of Citizens United. And, if I had my way, elections would last two months, they will be publicly funded and if a billionaire looked at a TV ad the wrong way, we’d put ‘em in jail,» Platner told a crowd of constituents Sunday night in Maine, earning applause. The comments came as Platner was laying out his far-left agenda and railing against conservatives, including calling President Donald Trump «dumb.»

«That’s one way to thank some of his own supporters for their generosity!» quipped veteran Republican strategist Colin Reed, who pointed to Platner’s prominent endorsers, like Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who received several contributions last month from billionaires like George Soros, Pat Stryker, Jon Stryker and Jennifer Pritzker, according to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.

PLATNER’S ANTI-CORPORATE CRUSADE HITS AWKWARD SNAG AS RECEIPTS TELL ANOTHER STORY

«Why worry about slowly slipping into a Marxist dystopia? With Graham Platner, you can sprint toward it!» Jason Savage, Executive Director of the Maine GOP, said in response to Platner’s stump speech remarks about jailing billionaires.

«Dude is big on locking people in rooms against their will, apparently,» joked CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings, an apparent reference to recent reporting on Platner’s past romantic relationships, including one ex-girlfriend’s allegation that he once twisted her arm behind her back, pushed her into a bedroom and held the door shut from the other side. Platner has denied the allegations.

‘HE HATED WOMEN’: EXPLOSIVE ABUSE, NEW NAZI TATTOO ALLEGATIONS FROM EXES ROCK PLATNER’S CAMPAIGN

Platner’s campaign has been dogged by controversies since he emerged as a progressive challenger in Maine’s closely watched Senate race against incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins, including recent complaints from multiple ex-girlfriends about his behavior during their relationships. The reports included accusations from one of Platner’s ex-girlfriends, Lyndsey Fifield, who told The New York Times about being trapped in a room by Platner during their relationship more than a decade ago.

«The Platner campaign has already spent more than $14 million and we aren’t even past the primary,» Shawn Roderick, a spokesperson for the Collins campaign told Fox News Digital. «Does Graham Platner really think that American taxpayers should be paying his high-priced political consultants and the tech billionaires who own the platforms where he does his advertising? He is floating this idea to distract from the many disturbing problems his campaign has faced over the past two weeks.»

Platner has also been facing backlash for exchanging sexually explicit messages with multiple women early in his marriage on the platform Kik. Following those reports, Platner was found to still have an active profile on Kik, an anonymous messaging app that has faced criticism from child-safety groups and law enforcement officials. The profile reportedly featured a shirtless mirror selfie of Platner with a towel around his waist, which Republican staffers later appeared to mock outside the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee by showing up in towels.

SENATE CANDIDATE GRAHAM PLATNER SENT EXPLICIT TEXTS TO MULTIPLE WOMEN WHILE MARRIED, WIFE SAYS: REPORT

Republican staffers, including National Republican Senatorial Committee staffers, protest outside the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee headquarters in Washington, D.C., wearing towels to mock Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s reported Kik profile photo. (Nicholas Ballasy/Fox News Digital)

Platner’s wife, Amy Gertner, reportedly disclosed the messages to campaign officials during an internal vetting process, and the campaign has acknowledged the messages existed while arguing the matter was addressed privately between Platner and his wife.

Meanwhile, Platner has argued that the allegations from former girlfriends are politically motivated, while his campaign has accused critics and national media outlets of focusing on private matters and personal attacks rather than the issues affecting Maine voters.

By the time those controversies hit the news, Platner had already faced scrutiny over a tattoo that critics identified as a Nazi-linked symbol, which he later covered up and said he was not aware of its meaning when he got it. One of Platner’s former staffers, Genevieve McDonald, alleged that even though Platner has said he was unaware of the symbol’s association with Nazis when he got the tattoo years ago, he has been aware of its meaning for some time.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Platner also apologized after his old Reddit posts resurfaced in which he made a series of inflammatory comments about rape, race, political violence, police, rural Americans and military veterans. Platner has said his views have changed and that some of his past comments reflected a darker period in his life after military service.

Graham Platner, a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Maine, points to a covered tattoo that had previously been an image recognized as a Nazi symbol, during an interview on Wednesday in Portland, Me. (WGME via AP)

Fox News Digital reached out to the Platner campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) for comment but did not hear back in time for publication.

En una entrevista en Infobae al Regreso, Gabriel Puricelli, licenciado en Sociología y docente, describió el escenario de máxima tensión política en Perú, donde el balotaje entre Roberto Sánchez y Keiko Fujimori se define voto a voto y la gobernabilidad aparece como el principal desafío.

Durante su paso por el estudio, Puricelli puso el foco en la diferencia mínima entre los candidatos y su impacto en la legitimidad del futuro gobierno. “La diferencia es tan pequeña que no es una elección donde los candidatos vayan a aceptar, como sucede muchas veces incluso en nuestro país, que se compute hasta el 99,70%. Acá la discusión va a ser ver hasta el último voto, analizar hasta el último voto”, explicó.

“La legitimidad de origen está, porque Perú una de las cosas que tiene, tiene unas autoridades electorales muy competentes cuyos resultados son respetados”, sostuvo Puricelli, al analizar el peso institucional de la ONPE. Sin embargo, advirtió que esa legitimidad “te sirve para los diez primeros kilómetros en Perú”, marcando la diferencia entre la aceptación del resultado y la capacidad real de gobernar.

La polarización se refleja en el recuento: con el 94% de las actas escrutadas, Roberto Sánchez, de Juntos por el Perú, aventaja apenas a Keiko Fujimori, de Fuerza Popular, con 50,10% contra 49,90% de los votos. El organismo electoral pidió cautela y no anticipar conclusiones antes del 100% del escrutinio.

Para Puricelli, el sistema político peruano “es excesivamente volátil”, a pesar de la continuidad económica garantizada por el presidente del Banco Central desde 2009. “El problema es que la legitimidad de origen te sirve poco tiempo, porque la ecuación de poder es muy poliárquica”, remarcó.

Un congreso menos fragmentado y demandas sociales diversas

Consultado sobre la posibilidad de mayor estabilidad, Puricelli distinguió: “Hay menos bloques parlamentarios en este Congreso que en el anterior. Eso hace que para el futuro presidente o presidenta haya que negociar con menos grupos, grupos que son un poco más homogéneos”. No obstante, recordó que la fragmentación del sistema y los comportamientos oportunistas dentro de los partidos siguen dificultando la gobernabilidad.

El especialista hizo hincapié en la diversidad de demandas sociales. “Hay una enorme fragmentación de la demanda política en la sociedad peruana. Hay demanda de seguridad, de educación, demandas regionalistas. El regionalismo define mucho esta elección”, señaló.

Describió que Roberto Sánchez obtuvo alrededor del 70% en la región amazónica y más del 65% en la zona andina, mientras que Keiko Fujimori concentró el 45% de sus votos en Lima, marcando una fuerte tensión territorial.

El voto en el exterior es otro factor decisivo: “En este momento estaba escrutado nada más que el 5% del voto exterior. Si Keiko confirma su victoria entre los votantes del exterior, podría estar más cerca de lo que se puede esperar a esta hora”, alertó Puricelli sobre la importancia de la emigración peruana en los resultados.

Puricelli comparó la situación peruana con la de Italia en la posguerra: “Gobiernos que duraban un promedio de 13 meses, que no completaban una legislatura y, sin embargo, Italia creció hasta transformarse en la quinta economía más poderosa del mundo”.

Planteó que en Perú “la fragmentación de la oferta política se explica por la insatisfacción social de los resultados que da una economía que crece, pero que no reparte de manera pareja ni entre estratos sociales ni entre regiones”.

Consultado sobre el mito de la estabilidad, afirmó: “Perú es de alguna manera un gran ejemplo de lo que puede ser crecimiento importante y dinámico al lado de un desarrollo mediocre. Crecimiento y desarrollo no son la misma cosa. Perú es exitoso en materia de crecimiento. No es un fracaso en términos de desarrollo, pero el desarrollo es mucho más mediocre que el crecimiento”.

Respecto al marco jurídico, subrayó: “El estallido del sistema de partidos políticos en Perú es decisivo para explicar la inestabilidad. Perú no logró reconstituir un sistema de partidos programáticamente reconocibles, con liderazgos reconocidos. Es un país que renueva su sistema de partidos políticos a cada elección”.

El debate incluyó paralelos con la Argentina y los sistemas de elecciones de medio término. Para Puricelli, los efectos del diseño institucional dependen de la interacción con la realidad social de cada país. “No creo que hay nada que condene ni que sancione como perfecto el sistema de la renovación de medio término. El problema es cómo interactúa esto con la política”, concluyó.

—

Infobae te acompaña cada día en YouTube con entrevistas, análisis y la información más destacada, en un formato cercano y dinámico.

• De 7 a 9: Infobae al Amanecer: Nacho Giron, Luciana Rubinska y Belén Escobar.

• De 9 a 12: Infobae a las Nueve: Gonzalo Sánchez, Tatiana Schapiro, Ramón Indart y Cecilia Boufflet.

• De 12 a 15: Infobae al Mediodia: Maru Duffard, Andrei Serbin Pont, Jimena Grandinetti, Fede Mayol y Facundo Kablan.

• De 15 a 18: Infobae a la Tarde: Manu Jove, Maia Jastreblansky y Paula Guardia Bourdin; rotan en la semana Marcos Shaw, Lara López Calvo y Tomás Trapé

• De 18 a 21: Infobae al Regreso: Gonzalo Aziz, Diego Iglesias, Malena de los Ríos y Matías Barbería; rotan en la semana Gustavo Lazzari, Martín Tetaz y Mica Mendelevich

Seguinos en nuestro canal de YouTube @infobae.