“The View’s” Sunny Hostin’s Endorsement of Platner Says it All

In a recent airing of “The View”, regular panelist Sunny Hostin endorsed Maine’s default Democrat Senate candidate Graham Platner. Nothing new there – except for her description of Platner.

She casually flips off Platner’s character with “So he’s a liar, a racist, an anti-Semite. He’s a homophobe.” (She did not address the infidelity and the distribution of his naked pictures to a large number of women. But she did say that “character does matter” – only to prove that, in her case, it does not.)

Her ringing endorsement is off key. One would be hard pressed to find an endorsement in the annals of political history so condemning of the candidate.

So, why would she make such an oddball endorsement? According to Hostin, “all that” does not matter. The lies? No matter. The racism? No matter. The antisemitism? No matter. The homophobia? No matter. She endorses Platner because she wants Democrats to take control of the Senate to stop President Trump’s agenda. The overriding issue is political power. She serves as further evidence that Democrat DNA is not based on principle, but power. They remain the party of power – and even more so since the radical left has gained dominance.

Hostin stands as an example of Trump Derangement Syndrome on steroids. Whether she admits it or not, Hostin essentially endorses lying, racism, antisemitism and homophobia in a deranged desire to fight Trump at every turn.

In terms of racism, the Democratic Party has long hypocritically look away from the racism in its own ranks — since the days of slavery to the institutional racism in America’s segregated major cities over which longstanding Democratic political machines have presided to this day.

Hostin is an example of how Democrats look away from the rising tide of antisemitism within the Party’s culture and infrastructure. Hostin’s embrace of antisemitism stands out with Platner, but it remains emblematic of the larger problem on the left.

This pattern of selective blindness reached new heights with Platner, but Hostin is not alone. Prominent Democrat leaders have lined up to endorse him despite the baggage. Elizabeth Warren praised Platner’s “progressive vision for working families,” framing his controversies as “distractions from the real fight against MAGA extremism.” Bernie Sanders echoed this, calling Platner “a fighter who will stand up to billionaires and corporate greed,” while downplaying the candidate’s personal scandals as irrelevant to policy goals. Other high-profile endorsers include Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who hailed Platner as “the bold voice Maine needs,” Chuck Schumer, who quietly backed him through Senate campaign apparatus, and even California Governor Gavin Newsom, who recorded a robocall urging voters to overlook “imperfections” for the greater goal of flipping the chamber. More power over principle.

Yet not every Democrat is willing to swallow this bitter pill. Several major office holders and strategists have publicly distanced themselves, arguing that Platner’s documented Nazi tattoo alone serves as a disqualifier that no amount of partisan calculus can erase. Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia called the tattoo “a bridge too far,” stating it represents values antithetical to American democracy. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s inner circle reportedly expressed private dismay, with one strategist anonymously telling Politico that “some lines cannot be crossed, even in a tough cycle.” Prominent Democratic consultant James Carville was blunt: “You can’t run on ‘character matters’ for decades and then shrug off a swastika on your candidate’s body. Even some progressive voices, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus, have withheld support, citing the antisemitism and racist undertones as irreconcilable with the party’s stated values on equity and inclusion.

This split reveals the tension at the heart of today’s Democratic Party. While the radical wing—embodied by Hostin, Warren, and Sanders—prioritizes raw power and anti-Trump fervor above all, more traditional or moderate figures recognize the long-term damage of embracing candidates whose personal failings and extremist symbols alienate independents and normal voters. Platner’s Nazi tattoo is not a youthful indiscretion that can be memory holed. It is an 18-year image that he has proudly worn and referred to for what it is. His campaign claims that it was just a foolish drunken act, and that he had no idea what it meant, is the lying part. It still remains as once visible emblem (at least when Platner went shirtless or full frontal naked) that now forces Democrats to confront their foundational culture. Is it power or principle?

Hostin’s endorsement on “The View” perfectly captures this moral inversion. By admitting Platner’s defects yet endorsing him anyway, she proves the modern left often operates on a single principle: defeating conservatives justifies any alliance, any compromise, any hypocrisy. Character only matters when it can be weaponized against the other side. In an era of deep polarization, this power-at-all-costs mentality doesn’t just erode trust in institutions—it accelerates the very cynicism voters increasingly reject. Democrats chasing Senate control through Platner may win a seat, but they risk losing what little remains of their moral credibility.

So, there ‘tis.