Actual NYT headline: "Does a Sex Assault Claim Kill a Political Career? It Depends."

[muriel_volestrangler]

Not the NYT PitchBot, which will need to up its game:

The swift exit of Graham Platner from the Maine Senate race followed Eric Swalwell’s similar exit from the California governor’s race, but Republicans have taken a different tack
...
It is a question on which the left and right have largely diverged: In recent months, Democrats have sought to expel problematic men swiftly, while Republicans in the era of Trump have often batted back accusations and stood by their men. There are notable exceptions in both directions, but the different approaches have cost Democrats talent and energy, and allowed some of the nation’s most powerful conservative figures to flourish.

Donald J. Trump won the presidency in 2016 even after the accusations of at least a half-dozen women who said he had groped or forcibly kissed them. He denied every one of them, but he would later be found liable by a jury for sexually abusing the writer E. Jean Carroll, yielding a $5 million civil judgment that a federal judge on Wednesday ordered him to pay.

The president went on to stand steadfastly by his nominees for various offices when they faced allegations of sexual improprieties, including Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — and so did a vast majority of his party. Each man denied the accusations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/08/us/politics/democrats-republicans-sexual-assault-politicians.html

I mean, contrasting them seems the right thing to do, but their tone is just "look, Republicans are powerful and flourishing, because they stand steadfastly by their men, while rejecting sexual assailants costs Democrats talent". Because sexually assaulting someone shows you have "talent".