Platner as an Eisenhower Rupublican President

I actually think your comparison is more interesting than it sounds at first. There is a real historical logic to it.

Platner has some qualities that evoke Theodore Roosevelt: physically vigorous, combat veteran, outdoorsman, unusually blunt, anti-establishment, suspicious of concentrated wealth, strongly pro-labor, and comfortable talking about national purpose and strength. Roosevelt himself was a Republican who became increasingly hostile to corporate power and defended organized labor and conservation.

And your Eisenhower Republican idea adds another dimension.

Eisenhower's Republicanism wasn't today's Republicanism. His "Modern Republicanism" essentially accepted much of the New Deal—including Social Security—while emphasizing fiscal restraint, infrastructure, national defense, international alliances and pragmatic government. He deliberately positioned himself between the New Deal Democrats and the more doctrinaire conservative Republicans.

Where Platner could fit that mold

If you stripped away the Democrat/Republican labels, I can see an unusual political combination in Platner:

Pro-worker and pro-union → Roosevelt/Eisenhower-era Republican tradition
Hostile to oligarchic corporate power → strongly Roosevelt
Veteran and national-service orientation → Roosevelt/Eisenhower
Outdoor/Maine identity and conservation → Roosevelt
Skepticism of endless foreign wars → potentially Eisenhower, particularly his famous warning about the military-industrial complex
Populist appeal to working-class voters who don't necessarily identify with the left → potentially very powerful
Discomfort with the Democratic establishment → already evident in his campaign

His actual platform, however, is substantially more economically progressive than Eisenhower's. Universal health care, much stronger government intervention in housing and labor, and reducing billionaire influence put him well to the left of Eisenhower.

But here's where your idea gets really interesting.

He could potentially represent a political realignment

Imagine a politician saying:

I'm not interested in whether an issue is traditionally Republican or Democratic. I'm interested in whether it makes ordinary Americans stronger, freer and more secure.

That is very close to the political territory Roosevelt occupied in his later Republican years.

And there is already evidence that Platner's appeal isn't neatly confined to conventional Democrats. During his Senate campaign, he explicitly talked about building a movement that brought together labor, community organizations and people who weren't traditionally political.

That's different from simply being "a progressive Democrat."

But the enormous obstacle is obvious

Before we get anywhere near presidential politics, the sexual-assault allegation and the controversy surrounding his past statements would have to be dealt with convincingly.

I'm deliberately saying allegation, because an accusation isn't a conviction. Platner denied the rape allegation and withdrew from the Senate race. His old online statements—including offensive comments about sexual assault and homosexuality—are a separate and documented problem.

If he could somehow emerge from that controversy with his reputation substantially restored, I wouldn't dismiss the possibility of a future national political career.

Would I predict him as a presidential candidate? No. That's much too speculative.

But I can see the political archetype you're describing:

A youngish, physically tough, anti-establishment Maine veteran who talks like a populist, loves working people, distrusts concentrated wealth, respects military service, dislikes endless wars, and isn't particularly comfortable with the modern Democratic establishment.

That person could conceivably find a political home that doesn't exist comfortably inside today's two parties.

And ironically, that is probably closer to Teddy Roosevelt's political DNA than to either today's Democratic Party or today's Republican Party.

Your "Eisenhower Republican" phrase is particularly apt because Eisenhower himself was essentially a pragmatic nationalist who believed government should serve the common good without becoming ideological.

I wouldn't be surprised if Platner's eventual political identity—if he gets another chance—turns out to be less "progressive Democrat" and more "American populist with a strong labor/conservationist streak." That could be a much more interesting political proposition than the Senate race he just left.