If a politician can't keep a vow to his wife, can we expect him to be honest with the public?

Question

Is this the rationale for placing so much importance on the private lives of candidates?

Answer 1

I think the public and the private life can be very different. How many people out here act differently at work than at home?

Answer 2

It is the rationale, but, I feel a bad one. Since watergate, the press has led more and more into the private lives of our political leaders. In doing so, I suspect many people that wuld otherwise run for office do not, out of concern, of taking their family through a public specticle of what is private and really no one else's business. I suspect more than one great President from the past would not pass the lithmus morality test we put today's candidates through today!

Answer 3

I hesitate to place so much emphasis on the private lives of our candidates. Divorce has become so prevalent in our society that over 50% of us have been divorced, at least once. Having said that, will those people be hypocritical or forgiving? I would tend to think forgiving. I haven't been divorced, but over half of our friends have been. Most of them are hard working individuals who have a good moral base in general. In our modern society I think it may be a false "test" of morals to apply it to public service.

Answer 4

My question would be, how can you be honest to the public and not your wife. Noone in thier right mind would care for and be more honest to the public then thier own wife or husband for that matter.
Bad habits start at home obviosely, but they will not stop there. I someone does drugs at home first, does that end up the only place he does them? Lying to people you dont know or care about is alot easier then lying to your family.

Answer 5

There are many men who can't seem to keep their privates in their trousers where they belong.

I don't see how this has anything to do with whether a given man with such a problem will sell us down the river, or do his job.

It seems to entirely depend on whether the politician in question is on one's side of the Great Divide -- when Republicans do it, it's OK with Republicans, and has nothing to do with their public life. When Democrats do it, Republicans howl "See? Can't trust ANY Dem in ANY way."

Democrats seem to focus more on the above hypocrisy than on the "can't keep his pants zipped" phenomenon itself.

Answer 6

It is the rationale and a faulty one. It's logic based on pure speculation.

Judge a person on their job, not their private life -- unless of course they themselves make their private life a matter of public discussion, e.g., "I'm a family man, therefore I am the best person to be your representative."

This type of rhetoric invites judging that person's performance on how they conduct their private life. And also spells a decline in true accountability.

Answer 7

Honest and Politician in the same sentence.

It took me a while to stop laughing and answer your question.

So fidelity and politics is a oxymoron.

It amazes me that people take these crooks serious.

Go big Red Go

Answer 8

The vast majority of the public has shown over and over that they dont care about a candidate's private infidelity, or prior marriages. this has been shown in the case of Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, FDR, and Grover Cleveland.

Answer 9

A lot of people do not want to do an extensive study on issues or explore a candidates viewpoints/ideas in depth...they want to examine personal lives, then make an instant judgement call of whether or not someone is worthy of office...it's mental laziness facilitated by the media.

Answer 10

I think morals should be an issue with the leader of the most powerful country in the world, and cheating on your spouse shows a lack of moral standards.

Answer 11

I think it is a red herring. If you disqualify men and women who cheat you are cutting out a huge % people. Not that I condone cheating though!