Thin Senate majorities mean one scandal could paralyze Congress —but neither party cares

A prominent conservative commentator recently argued that Democrats and Republicans are both applying a double-standard regarding seemingly disqualifying scandals for their Senate candidates in key races.“Maine Democratic Senate primary candidate Graham Platner and Texas Republican Senate candidate Ken Paxton are different candidates dealing with different scandals,” wrote The Bulwark’s Joe Perticone on Tuesday. “Paxton’s infidelity is not the same as Platner’s, nor is Paxton’s pattern of corruption and other moral shortcomings the same as Platner’s Nazi tattoo and history of racist comments online. I am not equating their wrongdoings, nor do I propose doing so.”Perticone is referring to the reports that Platner — an oyster farmer — had extramarital affairs, supported homophobic and sexist comments online and has a Nazi tattoo on his chest. Paxton has also had multiple extramarital affairs, fired whistleblowers, is accused of multiple financial crimes and participated in Trump’s coup attempt after the president lost the 2020 election. In 2023 he was impeached by the Texas House of Representatives on abuse of office and bribery charges, although the Texas Senate later acquitted him. Both Platner and Paxton are now considered by polling experts to be potential political liabilities to each of their parties’ chances of controlling the Senate after the 2026 midterm elections.“I asked some senators from both parties, many of whom either jettisoned all principles after coming to Washington or came to power in the first place simply by not having any, whether Americans should demand more of their elected officials on the character front,” Perticone wrote. “Yes, they all seemed to agree: Americans should hold politicians from the other party to a higher standard.” He then cited comments supporting Paxton from Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, John Kennedy of Louisiana and John Cornyn of Texas as well as Democrats backing Platner including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont (technically an independent) and Andy Kim of New Jersey (whose response to Platner was wishy-washy).“Selective moralizing has been around in politics as long as the profession has been practiced. The prominent Republicans who admonished Bill Clinton for his peccadilloes in the 1990s were hardly men of high character themselves,” Perticone continued. “White evangelicals grew more supportive of Donald Trump the more his traditionally sinful behavior came to light. Many Democrats who admonished Trump for his character are now biting their tongue about Platner. That’s the way this stuff goes.”While ha acknowledged understanding why partisans on both sides might support Platner or Paxton despite these scandals, simply because they don’t want their party to lose, he warned there is a practical as well as moral consequence to this attitude.“Candidates like this are still a massive risk, and not just because we don’t know what is yet to come out about either,” Perticone wrote. “Just consider the recent spate of expulsions, resignations, and absences in this Congress alone. Very thin majorities are often just one scandal away from stopping regular business for an entire chamber.”