Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

flabberghaster OP wrote

I feel that I should explain what this means... Ken Klippenstein wrote a notorious article about how platner proves that "smoothgroins" are out moded. Now that Platner is resigning aparently, all the "smoothgroins" (which if you define it as people critical of platner) are saying "i told you so".

3

nomorepie wrote

Why are they called smoothgroins? Like they are sexless people?

5

flabberghaster OP wrote

Here is the article if you want to read it:

https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/graham-platner-loses-washingtons

Basically he was saying (this was about a month ago) that people who hate Platner are ken doll, sexless dorks who don't get how Real Americans are. It was part of the "Platner shows the end of democratic HR lady politics" thing that was going around.

It was a shame because much of the time I like klippenstein's work. But that was a bonehead take. At the time we knew a bunch of bad stuff about him but not this and my reaction to it was just that it was a bizarre thing to say.

3

twovests wrote

IIRC we've been seeing arguments like this ever since back in 2016, at least?

I forget the details, but I remember a Dem leaving his position over a smaller scandal (iirc sexting or sexual harassment). There are real questions to be had about how "me too" could be weaponized by bad-faith actors, about how the resistance (before and during the first Trump term) could be harmed by giving up political ground in response to scandals.

I don't really keep up with whatever corner of the internet (X? 8Chan?) Klippenstein is getting his verbiage from, or whatever flavor of disparagement it's meant to imply, but I do actually agree with a lot of the article (a-priori the knowledge that Platner probably raped someone only a few years ago).

I think this accusation is credible, but every election cycle, I've anticipated tons of non-credible accusations weaponizing a political movement to assume good-faith from accusers. Especially now that the most powerful surveillance apparatus that has ever existed now being wielded for opposition research in one hand, and the best machines for fabricating large-scale evidence in the other. For an administration that lies constantly about everything, I don't know why we haven't seen "Mamdani is a pedo, Newsom was on Epstein's Island, AOC fucks dogs", etc. We've only seen this one accusation, and it's credible.

I guess another piece of evidence that Democrats really are the better party is that we aren't going to elect someone credibly accused of rape. Platner has to know that he's done. I know it's not even been 24 hours since the story dropped but he should have dropped out by now, he never even should have ran.

But if he does drop out, man. Establishment Dems are going to get to pick their own candidate yet again. Maybe it'll work this time.

2

twovests wrote

Oh this Klippenstein guy just posted a new article on the matter, which I basically agree with: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/my-graham-platner-apology

But, Ken, man, you have got to get off Threads and X. They're nazimaking sites full of the worst thinkers imaginable. You're snacking on lead paint with the nazis. Come to just_post instead although I think we will be very mean to you here

2

twovests wrote

Thoughts I want to add here, re: "I'd have expected a lot of abuses of the assumption of good faith in allegations".

I think the thing is I was actually wrong? I guess the reason you don't see these is that these messages don't stick. "Zohran Mamdani is a pedo! Gavin Newsom raped a dog!" would be recognized as bullshit on their face.

But maybe I was wrong that people in general shifted in large-scale to believing the accuser by default. Maybe there was a large-scale but small shift. Maybe I'm not the Genius of Nuance shaped by the vagaries of my own trauma.

I've also felt discomfort that rape, a term that implies the most serious violations possible, had moved to a more inclusive definition, where the severity of the trauma does not factor in to the definition. I felt scolded when talking about comparative experiences, etc when I was younger, unaware my questions were evoking bad-faith arguments. I've had a lot of thoughts on the matter but I think the framework "restorative justice" roughly matches my thoughts(? but I can't stand by all that, having had heard of it by chance.)

All that is to say, I was surprised to see people pretty routinely and regularly stressing the points that:

  1. This was severe. Platner isn't accused of merely meet the definition of rape, he is accused of breaking into his girlfriend's rural home against her explicit assertions not to

  2. These allegations are credible,

  3. This was recent. (Even the most optimistic, generous provider of the benefit of doubt can't forgive this.)

  4. He is unelectable.

To me, it signals that these are all important things to everyone. It matters that Platner wasn't accused of merely meeting an inclusive definition of rape, but that it was actually about as severe as someone could imagine. It matters that the accusations are very credible, with evidence that if fabricated you'd see Platner fighting with an easy win. It matters that this was recent and part of a pattern, because it precludes an optimistic, generous, benefit-of-the-doubt person who believes people even violent rapists can change. And it matters, even for someone who wants an anti-genocide candidate no matter who, because Platner isn't a viable candidate anymore. Even a Platner stan who believes all the allegations are false would have to bite it

1

devtesla wrote (edited )

I hate this. maybe you didn't need to explain what this meant

1

flabberghaster OP wrote

I felt self conscious that people might be taking my post as me calling platner haters (which includes me) that so I wanted to pierce the veil of irony to make sure people knew I was laughing at platner ride or dies who used terms like that.

2

devtesla wrote

Thank you for just posting and fuck planter and ken

2

Alessia wrote

My friend Emily is a nullo so I'll be sure to let her know she won.

3