It’s Graham Platner’s turn to be the center of the nation’s attention. The tattoo, the texts, the posts.

In the past, political scandals dwelt on what a candidate’s behavior said about their “fitness” for office, but “fitness” was typically vague: a person who would do such things is not the kind of person who should represent us.

It’s fair, though, to make a stronger connection between the scandal and the office: how will the character the scandal demonstrates translate to the choices a leader makes?

There is a chorus of Democrats, from voters in Maine to national commentators, making the argument that personal failings are not important compared to policy and platform; it doesn’t matter what Platner has done in his personal life if he has the right platform, and if he can win.

I’ve never believed that it’s possible to separate character and politics. Our political choices are an extension of our personal convictions.

Some Trump supporters were surprised that the President started an unnecessary war with Iran; they took him at his word that he would be an anti-war president. It should have been obvious that a man whose life is based on dominating others and glorifying himself would start a war. The surprise is that he ever claimed otherwise, and that people believed him.

Obviously, it’s not that simple. It’s possible for a man who has been dishonest and callous in his personal life to bring compassion and care to his politics. But the strength of incumbency in our politics means that we don’t always get a chance to correct our mistakes. The first election is when we decide; once they’ve got the office, they go where the current and their own engines take them. We’ve seen other cases where that great platform dissolves once the representative is in office. That might not happen here, but it might.

I hope Mainers vote for Platner, because whatever he is, leaving Trump a majority is worse. Still, Maine has 1.4 million people. Surely they could have done better.