Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
I agree with your assessment here overall. But THIS statement here? That doesn’t belong in this conversation. That there are people seriously pushing that being a rapist in general isn’t enough to disqualify someone from a position of power such as a Senate seat. Not just disqualify, but that it has no bearing on their ability to legislate.
We can’t see eye to eye when this is the kind of opinion being pushed.
I want to move forward, I want to talk about better candidates and how we get out of this mess and save the seat. I’m tired of seeing fellow leftists attacking women because Platner ended up being a bad candidate regardless of what anyone thinks of this new claim.
I think you meant to reply to a different comment.
No, I’m replying to you and I’m talking about the conversation that amniotic/PP_BOY_ and myself were having. The conversation we were having that you interjected.
I’m understanding of the alternate position as you laid it out. But not if the alternate position is also claiming that having valid claims of sexual assault and rape have no bearing on a person’s ability to govern. If the left’s position is now that we don’t care about rape or rape victims or women in order to win, then fuck the left.
We already said we didn’t care about his past military jaunts (mistakenly imo). And now we don’t care about rape allegations?
Okay. Thank you for clarifying. Its not always clear.
No I 100% agree with that. And I don’t agree with everything that @PP_BOY_@lemmy.world is saying, or at least, I’m not going to dig through their comment history with a fine tooth comb. But they are representing a voice which is happening right now in online discussion communities. As an example of this, Ryan Grim and Emma Vigeland are having a version of this exact discussion, at this very moment, and the majority report livestream (link: https://www.youtube.com/live/tr2CRLJsn90). So I elevate your discussion as an examplar of a broader conversation happening right now.
So maybe Amniotic Druid isn’t the best person to make the point, but they aren’t the only ones making the point. And I one THOUSAND percent agree with this statement:
Which is not whats happening, at least not in the aggregate or people defensively firing off strays. I think its important to engage with both sides core points, both of which are extremely valid. The situation has all the hallmarks of credibility and all the hallmarks of an insider hit job. No material evidence has been offered. Within an hour of the Politico story, mainstream Democrats had made their decision to deplatform Platner. This is its self a form of evidence of something.
Thank you for mentioning this, I’ll watch it later. Ryan Grim has had to walk back a few things he’s said about this issue as well, I’m incredibly disgusted with him and Drop Site in general about this.
We agree here. I think it’s a credible accusation which doesn’t mean it isn’t a hit job. And there’s valid conversations to be had about that, about moving forward, and the best ways to do so.
I, personally, cannot have the conversation about the conspiracy theories swirling around this with people who are out and out doing rape denial and victim blaming. So that’s why you see some vitriol from me on that front.
💯 understandable.
And I think this Joy-ann Reid clip (https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=dqeoETWBwc4) summarizes my position best. If its not an insider hit job, its being used exactly as if it was to do exactly what would be done if this were an AIPAC coordinated smear campaign. Its Maines choice. I mean Collins voted to send another person far more credibly accused of rape, Kavanaugh, to the supreme court. Thats a lifetime appointment, far far far more powerful than a senator. In the end its up to Maine to decide, but if the DSC tries to come in and make that decision for them, idk where that leaves things.
There are real divisions among Democrats right now, and I don’t just mean among the left. Whatever the Democrats are as a party, its clearly not a united front.
And so I guess the question I have for both sides is, how would you feel to be wrong about this, once the laundry is fully aired out? What if it comes out that the accusation turned out not to be credible, and the result of this was the handing over of the seat to an AIPAC Dem or a Republican, or even further, the full collapse of the current socialist moment the country is in (which this moment is very clearly being used for by the third way liberals)? And if you’re in defense of Platner, and they were to stay in and win, and it turns out the accusation is real, and they did commit to a violent SA, what is it exactly that you stand for?
Thank you, as usual, for having level-headed takes and being respectful. I usually agree with your views when I come across your comments.
added some edits.
I never liked Platner as a candidate based on his military experience and past social media comments. I was resigned to allow Maine to move forward how they wanted and after seeing the absolute push back from the left against anyone voicing concerns. Most of those people voicing concerns were women and people of color.
I don’t think there is ever going to be a time where Platner definitely proves he didn’t rape both of these women based on the evidence we do have.
This is a lesson to better vet our candidates and take things like saying how fun it is to kill people seriously. We need to actually see these candidates go through the steps of restorative justice to help prove they’ve changed and won’t be another Fetterman. If we’re going to stand on our morals over Republicans, then we shouldn’t abandon them in a bid to win.
No, this is an intentional misreading of my argument.
I’m not saying that being a rapist should ban a person from running for public office (I’m not not saying this, in general, though because I believe in rehabilitation, whether or not most people are willing to be rehabilitated is a whole different argument, etc. - that’s besides the point though.)
That’s because there is no proof, at all behind these allegations. Given how much attention has been given to this case, I find it hard to believe that the accuser could ever come up with that proof or she would’ve by now.
As it stands, the entire founding of the accusations are the testimony of one person who admitted to using “memory recovery” (hypnosis) to recall events and whose therapist, the only person contemporariously involved, has denied to go on record despite the victim urging her to.
The thing to be debated isn’t whether or not a rapist can run for Senate (because that’s not what’s happening here), it’s whether or not a person accused of rape can run for Senate, which I had hoped was an obvious “Yes” from anyone wise enough to believe in Democracy and and due cause.
Any “move forward,” is a move backward, back to candidates that were already offered that Mainers did not want.
There is evidence, you just don’t want to believe it. Don’t pretend like there is no evidence.
Mainers don’t want Platner with credible rape accusations either. Clearly.
So let’s move forward.
WHAT IS THE PROOF???
I’m sorry to yell but SERIOUSLY? What is the MASSIVE OBVIOUS thing I’m missing that has you convinced this isn’t a political hit job to take out a candidate who was unpopular with the establishment on both sides? Is there seriously nothing suspect to you?
You were content to call Platner a rapist before, now it’s just “credible rape accusation.” These are wildly different claims.
I’m sorry, but this is a pet peeve of mine and it’s actively hampering communication. Evidence is not proof. This woman’s statement is evidence, as is her email chain later with her therapist. Platner’s denial is also evidence. Neither is proof.
Oh you have me mistaken, I believe Platner is a rapist.
I’m not going to entertain this when you’re yelling at me. Absolutely not.
Does it feel good to shout down women who have concerns over rapists being elected?
You switch between “rapist” and “person with a credible rape accusation” when it suits your argument. Biden had a credible SA accusation, did you vote for him?
That’s because they aren’t mutually exclusive terms.
Never said that they were. One requires proof and you using it interchangeably shows your dishonesty. If he’s found guilty of the accusation then sure, but until then its your personal speculation, which means squat.
When only 2% of rapists ever see the inside of a courtroom, I don’t care what you think about my opinion here.