American Political Campaigns

[bujub22]

there all bad give me clinton that's right

[MagicNakor]

Despite all the clamour about the fidelity of politicians, and subsequently how Clinton was so much a dog, it's amusing to note that "America's most beloved President," JFK, was quite the womanizer. Maybe being assassinated put him on more of a rosy plane?

[Agrajag]

Originally posted by samsamsamsam+13 February 2004 - 21:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (samsamsamsam @ 13 February 2004 - 21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Agrajag@13 February 2004 - 19:56
However I would rather have a politically honest person who cheats in his private life.

Surely it&#39;s easier to be dishonest in politics and successful than it is to be honest and successful to some degree (unfortunately). To be honest in politics requires a lot of morality and sence of righteousness which is uncorruptable as their career advances. I can&#39;t imagine a profile of someone like this cheating on his wife. [/b][/quote]
I am not really sure what you are saying here. I think it is perfectly possible for someone to be politically honest and succesful. However I suppose that depends on your definition of succesful. There is also the point regarding morality. I may totally disagree with a policy and find it to be immoral, in my opinion. However someone else may believe it is right, state that openly and follow the policy through. They are being honest and in their view morally correct. However in my view what they are doing is immoral. It is not a black and white issue, it depends on the views of the people concerned.

[internet.news]

Originally posted by Agrajag+13 February 2004 - 20:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agrajag @ 13 February 2004 - 20:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by samsamsamsam@13 February 2004 - 21:05
<!--QuoteBegin-Agrajag

@13 February 2004 - 19:56
However I would rather have a politically honest person who cheats in his private life.

Surely it&#39;s easier to be dishonest in politics and successful than it is to be honest and successful to some degree (unfortunately). To be honest in politics requires a lot of morality and sence of righteousness which is uncorruptable as their career advances. I can&#39;t imagine a profile of someone like this cheating on his wife.

I am not really sure what you are saying here. I think it is perfectly possible for someone to be politically honest and succesful. However I suppose that depends on your definition of succesful. There is also the point regarding morality. I may totally disagree with a policy and find it to be immoral, in my opinion. However someone else may believe it is right, state that openly and follow the policy through. They are being honest and in their view morally correct. However in my view what they are doing is immoral. It is not a black and white issue, it depends on the views of the people concerned. [/b][/quote]
I didn&#39;t say it wasn&#39;t possible but to get to the top (or a high position) without wheeling and dealing a bit takes a lot of strength and morality (the sleezy shortcuts will be dismissed). I&#39;m certain that there have been many leaders who have risen to the top the long way and become successful (I mean career wise) - I was just saying that it takes a lot of personal integrity to do it that way.

I personally would see someone who would cheat on their wife as lacking this in a generalised way to some degree.

[Biggles]

I do follow the argument that it is unattractive if any public figure behaves like a cad (with the possible exception of Jack Nicholson). However, I am not convinced there is a direct correlation between infidelity and political dishonesty. Some of history&#39;s most barbaric and corrupt rulers have been quite prudish on matters pertaining to sex whereas some of the more rakish rulers have actually governed quite well.

I believe the French view that I mentioned earlier (in its more sophisticated version) states that love of political power is an unhealthy substitute for sex and that a politician who displays normal sexual urges cannot be all bad.

I am not arguing that we all go out and vote for sexual athletes (sorry Fugley), just that it does not automatically follow that if someone has had a love affair that they are incompetent to govern.

I thought the whole Christian thing was about forgiveness anyway - or did I dream that bit?

[Agrajag]

Originally posted by Biggles@13 February 2004 - 21:23
I do follow the argument that it is unattractive if any public figure behaves like a cad (with the possible exception of Jack Nicholson). However, I am not convinced there is a direct correlation between infidelity and political dishonesty. Some of history&#39;s most barbaric and corrupt rulers have been quite prudish on matters pertaining to sex whereas some of the more rakish rulers have actually governed quite well.

I believe the French view that I mentioned earlier (in its more sophisticated version) states that love of political power is an unhealthy substitute for sex and that a politician who displays normal sexual urges cannot be all bad.

I am not arguing that we all go out and vote for sexual athletes (sorry Fugley), just that it does not automatically follow that if someone has had a love affair that they are incompetent to govern.

I thought the whole Christian thing was about forgiveness anyway - or did I dream that bit?

Hear Hear, though fugley&#39;s sexual athletisism must count for something.

[internet.news]

Originally posted by Biggles+13 February 2004 - 20:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Biggles &#064; 13 February 2004 - 20:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>However, I am not convinced there is a direct correlation between infidelity and political dishonesty.[/b]

You&#39;re probably right - that&#39;s just how the impression of it affects me (right or wrong) and someone morrally corrupt in their personal life may not be in their career - maybe


<!--QuoteBegin-Biggles@13 February 2004 - 20:23
(with the possible exception of Jack Nicholson)[/quote]


Agreed

[vidcc]

well a few well put points have arisen. Apart from my previous comments i would like to add that it would be refreshing if for once we could have an election campaign where the candidates fight purely on policy. This goes for both sides, I find the mudslinging about Bush&#39;s military past just as annoying as i do about all the other things dragged up about the pasts of the other candidates.
I find it more a reason to not vote for a candidate that runs a "dirty character assasination" campaign as i think it&#39;s more childish than anything else...name calling.
Unless something actually comes up such as the candidate being a serial killer or paedophile or similar then i find the whole process to be an embarassment to my country.
we need political talent that will help ALL the American people in real terms and for that i don&#39;t care what they get upto in their own bedrooms

[internet.news]

Originally posted by vidcc@13 February 2004 - 22:51
i would like to add that it would be refreshing if for once we could have an election campaign where the candidates fight purely on policy.

and you&#39;d trust that?


Edit - POlicies in UK/USA materialised - 57%

[vidcc]

I am not so gullible as to think that every policy will come into reality...but for an election that is the best we can base our descision on. If a candidate goes back on his word then i will remember that the next time i vote.