Is Troy Jackson finished because of a strange family revelation? No, and nobody serious should pretend this is in the same universe as a criminal charge, a Nazi tattoo, or the sort of baggage that helped sink Graham Platner, as reported by Townhall.

But for Maine Democrats, who are already trying to pretend their Senate bench is not a rolling circus act, this is another awkward chapter. Jackson is now the Democratic contender expected to face Sen. Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, after Platner exited amid a rape allegation and a pile of other controversies.

Jackson may look safer than Platner on paper, which is not exactly a towering achievement. The bar Democrats cleared here appears to be somewhere near the basement floor.

The latest curiosity comes from reporting about Jackson and Lana Pelletier, the woman long described in different settings as his domestic partner or, at times, his wife. The two have adult children together, but the reporting says they are not legally married.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

That alone would be a personal matter for most voters. The wrinkle, of course, is that Pelletier is reportedly Jackson’s second cousin, a detail that has sent political observers racing straight into Deliverance territory.

To be fair, American history is not exactly free of cousin marriages among political elites. John Adams married Abigail Smith, his third cousin, Thomas Jefferson married Martha Wayles Skelton, also his third cousin, and Franklin D. Roosevelt married Eleanor Roosevelt, a distant cousin.

So the cousin connection itself is more odd than automatically disqualifying. Still, when a modern Senate candidate builds a brand around being the authentic working class voice from the north woods, voters are allowed to notice when the family tree starts looking like it was assembled by committee.

In Allagash, the relationship has reportedly been known for years. Locals in small communities often understand family connections that outsiders only discover once campaign season turns over enough rocks.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Following recent reports that Congress is considering a nationwide voter ID requirement for federal elections, do you support requiring voters to show identification before casting a ballot?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

Jackson’s campaign materials reportedly describe Pelletier as his “partner.” Older official biographies, according to the reporting, sometimes used the word “wife.”

That distinction could matter far more than the jokes. Maine does not recognize common law marriage, and Senate candidates are required to provide financial disclosures that typically include the finances of a spouse.

If Jackson and Pelletier are not legally married, the question becomes whether her assets, income, and liabilities must be disclosed at all. That could leave voters with a less complete picture than they would get from a candidate whose spouse is clearly covered by the rules.

For a Democrat selling a working-class image, that is not a small concern. Financial disclosure laws exist because voters deserve to know who may have influence, who may benefit, and whether a candidate’s public image matches his private finances.

As of the reporting, Jackson had not filed his disclosures or requested an extension. The unusual way he became the nominee has also left questions about when the secretary of the U.S. Senate will require full transparency.

Then there is the ballot eligibility issue, which may be more serious than the family chatter. Jackson previously ran for governor in the primary and lost, and Maine State Rep. James White has argued that he should not be able to pivot into a different race in the same election cycle.

White’s argument points to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in Storer v. Brown, where the Court described primaries as “an integral part of the entire election process.” According to that view, Democrats cannot simply pretend the primary and general election are wholly separate worlds whenever it helps their replacement plan.

The argument also cites Maine law barring candidates from seeking more than one office “at any election.” Maine does not have an explicit sore loser statute like some states, but White argues that the existing provisions function that way when read together.

Whether that argument wins in court remains uncertain. What is clear is that Democrats have once again managed to produce a nominee with enough unresolved questions to keep lawyers, opposition researchers, and local gossips fully employed.

Jackson also brings a reputation for a temper from his time in state politics. Reports describe him being removed from the speaker’s office and later throwing a water bottle to the ground during a dispute over prescription drug pricing.

None of this means Jackson is doomed. It does mean Maine Democrats, after the Platner collapse, have landed on a candidate who still comes with plenty of explaining to do.

For now, Democrats have their man, complete with family questions, disclosure questions, eligibility questions, and a temper file. If this is what party leaders call cleaning up the ticket, Maine voters may want to keep their boots on.

The Real MOU: What Trump’s Iran Agreement Actually Says – Truth Thursday | EP 677

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.