The Weinstein Story Is Not a Democratic One

What can we learn from the Republican effort to turn the Harvey Weinstein story into a hit against Democrats -- despite the very obvious problem that many of those same Republicans are either supporting or working for a president who has also been accused of sexual assault (and who, remember, has a good-sized group of accusers who appear to be about as believable, if not quite as numerous, as Weinstein's accusers)?

On the merits, as Seth Masket discusses, this is pretty preposterous stuff. Both parties have been plagued by politicians guilty of similar crimes; no doubt both parties have had hundreds of similarly guilty donors, activists and staff. Politicians, too, in both parties. If we think of Weinstein as a Democratic party actor, which is fair, then it's certainly appropriate for the party to sever their relationship with him -- something, of course, that most Republicans haven't done with Donald Trump. It may even be reasonable to say that severing should include ridding themselves of his now-tainted money. But holding the party responsible for not breaking ties with him before the news was reported? That's ridiculous, and no politician or party could survive that standard. As Masket says, it would be like "holding fans of the 1970s Buffalo Bills and the 1978 film Capricorn One accountable for O.J. Simpson’s behavior in 1994." Do we really want to bounce any politician who liked "The Cosby Show"?