Do you care if your political leaders are sleeping around?

@Video_Game_King said:

@Hamz:

What if they're single?

Then no harm no foul in my eyes.

But to a certain extent if they're spending more time chasing tail than on running a country or serving in political office then I'd question if they're in the right sort of job.

I'd care a lot if they spent their political career touting the sanctity of marriage.

In the case of Patraeus though, we don't really have evidence that his affair affected his ability to act out the responsibilities of his office.

General Allen on the other hand...30 thousand pages of e-mail? Wtf.

Of course not I'd do it too. Joking of course, it bothers me because I believe a strong leader needs strong morals.

They could not impeach Clinton but a General no problem.

Sure it does.

From Nixon to Clinton, what good are leaders if they won't be honest?

The reasoning of "we all did at one point" holds no weight with me. If our leaders are on par with us then why are they in leadership? I want extraordinary men and women taking the reins.

@mlarrabee said:

Sure it does.

From Nixon to Clinton, what good are leaders if they won't be honest?

The reasoning of "we all did at one point" holds no weight with me. If our leaders are on par with us then why are they in leadership? I want extraordinary men and women taking the reins.

As a gamer I am fine with a Player as the leader. ;)

Yes, am I not good enough for them?

I got them into the office, the least I deserve is some steamy sexting.

@mikey87144: Actually in the UK politicians frequenly get the screws put to them over their extra-marital affairs. The one that sticks in my mind is David Blunkett or Charles Clarke fast-tracking their nannies visa application because they were screwing her. I can't remember which one it was. I'm fairly certain whichever one it wasn't was discovered to be nailing one of his aides as well. A female cabinet member (Hazel Blears, iirc) during the expenses scandal a couple of years ago was much derided for charging her husband's porn to her MPs expense account. One of the contributing factors to Tony Blair's victory in 1997 was John Major's government's long string of "sleaze" scandals, although these weren't limited to extra-marital affairs. Candidates also trot out their WAGs in much the same way as US presidentials do, perhaps starting with Cherie Blair. Samantha Cameron was a fairly strong part of the current PMs campaign, as was Sarah Brown for the doomed PM unelect, although Clegg rather prudently kept his wife low-key for not being properly english.

You might get more traction saying that mainland europe is more lenient about sexual pecadilloes: I believe Mitterand's extra-marital affairs were fairly common knowledge, and Sarkozy's slightly creepy marriage to Carla Bruni didn't seem to be an issue, and of course we have Berlusconi to contend with, although that may be less to do with a laissez-faire attitude of the italians and more to do with Italy's long history of political apathy and his complete dominance of Italian media. I suppose they only really put up with it while times were good, his fortune having well and truly turned over the past few years. And I can think of one definite example where a leader's philandering was held against him, in the case of Vaclav Havel, the first president of the Czech Republic, although that probably has more to do with the popularity of his wife, Olga, than any particular hatred of the act itself. (interesting fact: When he was released from prison after the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia, Havel visited his mistress before his wife).

Don't know if any of this interests you or anyone, but I thought you might find it comforting that people elsewhere are mostly as hung up on irrelevant bullshit as the USA. I suppose the reasoning is that it shows a man to be either untrustworthy or too ruled by his emotions to be sensible, although the latter I find a forgivable flaw and I don't know thatg infidelity necessarily means the former in any case.

To an extent. That type of information can be used to blackmail a political leader toward a specific goal. "If you don't approve my permits to start drilling for oil in Mt Rushmore, then I'll release the pictures of you being spanked by your leather-clad secretary." Also, it would be bad if people with access to sensitive material were to find themselves in illicit situations with beautiful foreign spies. Finally, it displays an attitude that being deceitful is okay. I think there is enough distrust in our political figures without compounding it by adding affair after affair. "How do you know if a politician is lying? His lips are moving."

no, (insert the same reason everyone who says no is saying)

If they're married, I'd rather see them show some respect to the people they've made vows to- politicians lie enough as it is. If they're single then whatever. I don't think it should cost them their jobs, though. If the public doesn't like it, they won't get re-elected, democracy will take care of the problem itself.

They could not impeach Clinton but a General no problem.

In Petraeus' case, the fact that he let himself get caught cheating is much worse than the cheating itself. As for elected politicians, I think it depends how much they've been pushing themselves as a 'family man' (/woman), which is usually a lot.

NO, Bill Clinton is one of the best president that has ever been in office while getting blow jobs on the job. As long as it doesn't affect in their performance i dont care what they do.

@mclakers said:

NO, Bill Clinton is one of the best president that has ever been in office while getting blow jobs on the job. As long as it doesn't affect in their performance i dont care what they do.

What if they lie under oath?

Yes, because it's a sign of poor judgement, and for an elected official it matters and relects upon other matters of trust and responsibility. It's personal for sure but they all know going in that they're under a microscope... as they should be. The higher expectation of personal conduct is part of their offices and positions going in obviously.

The Clinton situation really disappointed me after all the good he did for our country and the pall it put on all of that, all the while opening the box of crap for his opposition and their agenda gaining the consequential momentum. Lead to dark years in American politics imo w/Bush Jr. et al.

If they're a good leader (a rarity, but it can happen), I don't really care where they stick their privates.

@Manhattan_Project said:

People who cheat are assholes. I don't make it habit to trust assholes, so yes, I do care.

Yup, I pretty much came here to say this.

I don't give a shit. Do their job. Honestly I doubt many of us would be able to turn down the constant bedroom eyes from females if we were in their position. You might say it now, but being politically powerful fucks with your head.

bill burr explains this pretty well.

no, only if they have been outspoken against infidelity. However nothing makes me angrier than a No Gays Politician getting busted in a homosexual affair. They should just be themselves and not use hate to cover up their own insecurities about their sexuality, which isn't even an issue if your honest about it.

It really shouldn't matter, but people tend to use those incidents as a means of judging character and honesty. Which is a bit silly. I don't care unless I'm somehow involved directly.

No. The media is only making a huge deal out of this because they're hungry for news with the election finally being over.

If they do their job well I couldn't care less

Not even a little.

It's their job to sleep around. I'd be more worried if they didn't.

no, not by itself.

it does however show a flaw in their character, so in the end yes.

I don't care at all. I think cheating isn't a clear black and white issue even when you set aside the question of whether it's a political leader doing it. At the same time, I'd rather not have a political leader going through a nasty divorce. I think that'd diminish his effectiveness.

I swear stories about politicians ''sleeping around'' never happen here in Canada, the US seems obsessed with that shit compared to us.

I don't really give a fuck, of course there are bounds of reason if the person has affairs every month then that's not good, but an affair isn't going to tarnish a pollitician's image in my eyes if he or she has a good track record on actual policies and you know, their job.

Generally, I couldn't care less but it depends on the circumstances.

I'm tempted to say that cheaters are people who really undervalue others' livelihood, and those are people who really shouldn't be in office, but who knows if those political marriages are even based on love and whether or not the spouse would be affected by the cheating?

People hold celebs in high regard and shit and they love to read all the dirty shit they do so why should political people be any different? Suck and fuck baby!

More like...General BETRAYEUS!! Haha! Nothin but net!

@Fredchuckdave said:

Depends on if they display themselves as the pinnacle of morality or if they readily admit being lecherous. Note I'd prefer it if there was a strong sense of morality in all aspects of life but there just isn't anymore so it's something you have to deal with. It'd be interesting to have a Bachelor president a la Buchanan though, maybe he'd be like Derek Jeter or something. Jeter 2016. 7 billion undeserved Gold Gloves! 3000 hits! He's a Yankee! 15000 women!

As a Yankees fan I can tell you Derek Jeter is the single greatest baseball player ever. And I don't need facts to back that up.

@Everyones_A_Critic said:

I don't give a fuck if the president shoots Heroin as long as he does his fucking job.

This reminds me of a Dave Chappelle monologue about a crack-addicted president. "Sing the treaty, man, I'll suck your dick!"

Funny thing, Petraeus is in Black Ops 2. I thought that was funny.

Funny thing, Petraeus is in Black Ops 2. I thought that was funny.

Only if they are sleeping with the enemy.

So David is/was married to this women:

and this chick offered to let him to go "ALL IN" her snatch:

So can you blame the guy for thinking with his wrong "head"?

Now he kinda pushed it to the limit by getting involved with this jill kelly chick which appears to be a acquaintance of David and his wife and after google searching her name it appears that a pornstar has the name jill kelly so that must mean she is bad business right?

Jill Kelly is next to david's wife thinking I would like some 4 star general on the side of my doctor husband.

In the U.S. Military, adultery is a potential court-martial offense so yeah its kinda a serious business and he was the head of the CIA and I don't think you want him to be worrying about being "found out" when he has the lives of American citizens and others in his hands.

@mikey87144 said:

Honestly, this whole thing with the head of the CIA has me rolling my eyes. Call me a cynic if you want but I'm of the opinion that ALL people in any sort of power are serial cheaters. What evidence do we have to contradict that? I wish the US had a more realistic viewpoint on this, like in the UK for instance, and stop making it look like some sort of shocking thing that no other person in power would do. Don't these guys, or gals, get married only to make themselves look good?

Yeah I know. Freaking insane to expect a politician to actually at least act like a decent human being. I mean if Obama wants to smoke a blunt on TV it should be cool too right?

No offense, but if I can't trust a politician to at least "try" to be faithful to their wife/husband that doesn't really say anything good about them on any level. If I can't trust them to do something that simple, what else can I not trust them to do? Keep government secrets? Actually pay their taxes? Follow you know.... the law? Not allow "campaign" donations to decide how they vote on issues, instead of say listening to their constituents?

When you have no expectations on how the people who run your country behave don't be surprised when you find out it is run by jack asses who abuse their authority and look at the "people" with nothing short of derision.

@ZeForgotten said:

No. Well unless of course he was sleeping with my soon-to-be wife of course. Then I would have to kill him. Then I would be on my way to prison and BAM, zombie outbreak.

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Blastroid

They could not impeach Clinton but a General no problem.

That's because the attempt at impeaching Clinton was a purely political power play and a mockery of the constitution that explicitly states that impeachment is only meant for high crimes. Anyone who believes otherwise has no knowledge of the constitution. Had Clinton been impeached it would have been a pathetic, gross partisan attack and nothing more.

Well he did sell nuclear weapon plans to china and get caught in a few lovely scams, not to mention it is a proven that he dodged a draft (hell we threw Muhammad Ali in jail for that), evaded paying his full taxes, and lied under oath in actual court hearings. Clinton is actually a pretty great example of why the "no it doesn't matter" side is sort of well.... wrong. In fact screwing basically anything with tits and two legs was actually about the least of the things he did.

I believe it shows poor judgment, and it's not like it doesn't influence my opinion of them at all, but at the end of the day if they are doing a good job, I really don't care.

@MariachiMacabre: Well, I doubt he voiced him, but he as a character is in it, quite a bunch I believe. I hadn't played the game myself yet, but there were quite a few times when I turned around and saw a cutscene as my brother played and saw him.

@Everyones_A_Critic said:

I don't give a fuck if the president shoots Heroin as long as he does his fucking job.

It depends. If they are honest about it, I don't really care. If they do it, get caught and than lie about it (like Bill Clinton did) then it is a problem because they straight out lied to the public. That's not cool.

I understand that all politicians lie, but it is one thing to lie about campaign promises - it's another thing to look someone in the face and lie you ass off when everyone knows you are lying.

It just shows your true character. How can we trust you with the entire country when we can't even trust you not to sleep around or get a bj under a desk?

I care more about them fucking me over in the long run.

On snap, c whut I did thar, lol.

Yes. I mean don't you want your leaders to act morally? It's basically saying that it's completely fine for a President to be complete raging asshole who's rude to everybody, as long as he does a good job running the country. Just like it's completely ok for your boss to be a rude, offensive prick to you as long as he does his job well. Now if a politician is sleeping around and is unattached, I see no problem, but then again I don't have a moral problem with that. To the Petreus affair (lol) specifically, I kind of want to say it mattered less because he wasn't a politician he owes no moral duty to the American people.

Yes. I mean don't you want your leaders to act morally? It's basically saying that it's completely fine for a President to be complete raging asshole who's rude to everybody, as long as he does a good job running the country. Just like it's completely ok for your boss to be a rude, offensive prick to you as long as he does his job well. Now if a politician is sleeping around and is unattached, I see no problem, but then again I don't have a moral problem with that. To the Petreus affair (lol) specifically, I kind of want to say it mattered less because he wasn't a politician he owes no moral duty to the American people.

@DarthOrange said:

@Inkerman said:

Yes. I mean don't you want your leaders to act morally? It's basically saying that it's completely fine for a President to be complete raging asshole who's rude to everybody, as long as he does a good job running the country. Just like it's completely ok for your boss to be a rude, offensive prick to you as long as he does his job well. Now if a politician is sleeping around and is unattached, I see no problem, but then again I don't have a moral problem with that. To the Petreus affair (lol) specifically, I kind of want to say it mattered less because he wasn't a politician he owes no moral duty to the American people.

What do you mean by morally? According to whose morals? Yours?

Well as a voter, yes, it's completely reasonable to expect that the person I choose to vote for is 'moral' according to my personal definition. But in the case of adultery specifically, I don't think it's viewed as a 'moral' or even 'morally ambigious' act in any Western country.