In this context, the Broaddrick case has often brought about unease on the part of people who are generally supportive of the Clintons. In an October 2016 recap of the case, Dylan Matthews of Vox said: "The basic answer is that some of the claims Bill Clinton appear more credible than others. There are three main accusers others being Jones and Willey, of whom it seems by far the most credible—based on the publicly available evidence—is Broaddrick." Matthews continues: "Given the prevailing view among many progressives—including Hillary Clinton—that one should default to believing rape accusers, the Broaddrick allegation thus poses a problem." Michelle Goldberg of "Slate" wrote in a late 2015 essay, "our rules for talking about sexual assault have changed since the 1990s, when these women were last in the news. Today, feminists have repeatedly and convincingly made the case that when women say they've been sexually assaulted, we should assume they're telling the truth. Particularly when it comes to Broaddrick, it's not easy to square the arguments against believing her with the dominant progressive consensus on trusting victims. This is a tension that people on the right are eager to exploit."