. In a democratic society your vote should be determined by the whole range of issues that you consider to be important - including the candidates' personal lives, assuming those facts become known to you. . However, that is not intended to imply that society should go out of its way to find out about peoples personal lives and make those facts publicly known. . My considered opinion is that politicians are likely to carry the whole "baggage" of their personality (including their personal lives) into their public decision making, even if only at a fairly superficial level: . Examples: ‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾ (a) Someone who is an extreme racist or sexist etc., in private, is not likely to be inclined to speak ( or vote ) in favour of equality of opportunity among different racial and gender groups. . (b) If you are very concerned with the general deteriorating standards of morals in society, then you would probably not have your attitudes adequately represented by someone who was known to routinely live a very dissolute and licentious life in private.
Best wishes - Majikthise. .
I'm not so much into US politics. I live in Germany. Fortunately, around here it is rather common that a politician in an important office is divorced 3 times (our former Chancellor Schroeder), is homosexual (our current state secretary of foreign affairs), participated in violent street riots and threw stones at the police when he was a teenager (our former state secretary of foreign affairs) or has an out-marriage affair and a kid with the other woman (the Ministerpräsident of Bavaria - first man of an important federal state). The newspapers still try to do some mud-slinging whenever such a story is discovered. But people usually don't let that influence their voting. But then, they also tend to easily overlook when politicians do wrong within their office at the expense of the public. I tend to be rather unforgiving about such things.
I, personally, would not mind whether the politician leading my country has got seven girlfriends and three boyfriends living in his home and having orgies after work, as long as he or she is good at the job. As long as they make the country and the world good for all its inhabitants, they can do whatever they like in private. I just don't care.
But I would understand if my neighbor does not feel adequately represented by a person with a lifestyle that my neighbor considers extremely inappropriate.
However I do insist that digging out misdemeanors from a politicians distant past and defaming his or her campaign with that, in a major media mud-slinging contest - whenever you are out of arguments - is extremely bad style.
To me, that behavior should be minus points for the mud-slingers campaign.
I'm not so much concerned about their sexual conduct as in an adult world President after President throughout history has had sexual indiscretions whether they were made public or not. I don't believe that determines their ability to lead a nation with the problems sorrounding it. It just makes them human with human faults. That's where I think the US is too overboard in self rightousness. Expecting a high profile, power figure to really be a celibate might be nice in theory but not realistic. Anymore that that would have anything to do with how they would run a country. But what they did and how they handled governing decisions, while climbing the political ladder... does matter.
In general no. I don't really care what candidates do on their time. I do have little patience for politicians who claim to hold the moral high ground and be the conscience of our nation who turn out to be doing the vary things they speak out against. For example, Newt Gingrich impeaching President Clinton for lying about a personal mater in a politically motivated lawsuit funded by his political enemies when Gingrich himself was having an affair and lying about it. If someone is going to ask us to vote for them because of their sterling character than they better be walking the walk instead of just talking the talk.
In Wisconsin the race for Mayor was between the current and former mayor of Madison. Both from the get go agreed to eliminate any mud slinging or finger pointing and just discussed and debated the issues and what they would do. It was a complete class act and breath of fresh air to listen to them. Personally, I have zero respect for those in office who made public comments about Obama. Not because he was Obama but the disrespect shown to the office of President.
Many politicians started out as lawyers, They can say anything to sway the voting public into believing they will act accordingly to what they say they will do...However, once elected that can change. Their personal life prior, can be an indicator as to their moral fiber and their sincerity to address the issues that got them the voters. With what we have to choose from... today we have to really do our homework if we don't want things to become even worse.
For me yes, but it's personal. I wouldn't like it if my president did not have the same personal value just as I wouldn't vote for a president who did not have the same political values that I have. I don't see personally how someone with 20 wives (which equals our president) can focus on them and running a country at the same time.
I have to agree with Rotten sheep some politicians run an entire campaign on mud slinging and point fingers for actions they themselves took part in. That too should be an indicator of how they will do things once elected.
Good ole Newt has a habit of turning the mirror away from himself and onto Obama and others, so nobody takes notice of what he's responsible for in his own doings.....He's got the morals of a honey badger...LOL