this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
270 points (95.6% liked)

politics

30339 readers
2145 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A woman who previously dated Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner said he drunkenly forced her to have sex after she told him to stop, according to a Politico report released Monday, leading prominent supporters to pull their endorsements and throwing a must-win race for the party into turmoil.

Platner denied the allegation, but said he would be considering next steps for his campaign.

“Regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting but mindful of the political reality it will inflict, we’re taking the time to reflect on the best path forward,” he said in a video released on social media.

Jenny Racicot, who lives in Maine, told Politico that Platner entered her home in 2021 while drunk and assaulted her. Racicot said she had been in an on-and-off relationship with Platner, but she cut off contact with him after that night and told him the incident wasn’t consensual. A voicemail left at a number listed for Racicot seeking comment did not receive an immediate response.

Platner’s campaign did not immediately respond to an email and phone message from The Associated Press seeking comment.

“Any accusation of non-consensual behavior is categorically false,” Platner said in his video.

Still, the allegation sparked a flight away from a candidate who has long been controversial. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat who’d stood by Platner even as the insurgent candidate was hit with prior allegations, said Monday’s was enough. “I’ve been very clear that sexual assault or violence against women is a red line,” Khanna said. “These allegations are very serious and credible. Graham Platner should drop out from the race. I am withdrawing my endorsement.”

Edit: holy shit, these comments are insane.

Regardless of what you believe with this, Platner likely cannot win anymore. He has a week to do the right thing and drop out before he's fully locked in. If he actually gives any sort of a shit (and doesn't just want power, like rapists seeking office tend to), he needs to drop out yesterday.

This is the nail in the coffin for his campaign. It's not time to defend him no matter what, because there's still a week where a new candidate can be put into place. Instead of being mad at people not wanting to vote for him, you should start vocally supporting another candidate.

(page 7) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

The World's Billionaire Blackmail Machine is working well.

[–] Nefara@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (42 children)

Everyone saying it's more credible than the last accusation, when the bar was on the floor for the last one. A woman is coming forward at the absolute most politically expedient time for the billionaires (not when he started his campaign, not when he started getting national attention) who voluntarily deleted all evidence of the incident herself but obliquely mentioned some vaguely troublesome things to some people who will all remain anonymous.

Ah yes truly we must all be fools for taking this with a grain of salt.

load more comments (42 replies)
[–] tubthumper@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I genuinely do not know what to believe anymore.

Edit: the timing and optics might be poor, but I at least believe we should consider this credible. Platner should have to defend himself here, not her.

Edit edit: Trauma has no timeline.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (14 children)

People let some Nazi merc slide because he broke out the working class starter pack dialogue choices. We need to return to context clues and some basic morals. Having a Nazi tattoo is instantly disqualifying in any party but the Republican one.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 days ago

Yup. The people here are so desperate that they'll accept literally anyone who gives them the most basic lip service. It's pathetic.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Bullshit. Allegations with political timing should always be dismissed. Anything said with a motive to lie, and to be paid to lie, is a problem. Dems want to lose again, and just get paid to lose.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›