-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Weiner for mayor of your city?
- Thread starter Josie
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
No it doesn't. A person's personal life has nothing to do with their competency at their job.
You falsely charging it doesn't change the fact you're wrong. I've know a few different people I wouldn't trust with a lucky penny outside of work, but were very good at their job.
How well he performs his job. Does he attempt to follow through on his promises. Is he active or just collecting a paycheck. Etc.
The fact is a person's sexual desires have nothing to do with their ability to do their job. Besides that, we don't know what kind of a relationship he has with his wife. Maybe they are only married for political reasons. Maybe they have an open marriage and she doesn't care he's been doing these things. Maybe she wants them to be a dedicated couple and was horrified and embarrassed that he was doing these things. We don't know. But, more importantly, it's irrelevant to what kind of performance he has on the job.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
please read: " but the level of competency and constant lying in the process of dealing with that scandal certainly speaks to his potential to perform such a job"
The part about "process of dealing with that scandal" suggests we are discussing how he attempted to deal with something publicly
Do you trust them working with money? Because here confidence and trust are very important aspects of the job, Gordy
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
And what he was dealing with publicly was his personal sex life. It did not involve his job. Like I said.
I would. *shrug*
Would I trust Weiner? I have no idea, like I said from the beginning, I don't know enough about him. But exposing his penis over the Internet does not mean he is not worthy of trust in matters related to his job.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
And his attempts to deal with it publicly came off as incompetent and buffoonish. So see, we are simply not dealing with his private life like you previously claimed
A big aspect of his job would be dealing with the public, who will need to trust him ...
So you don't trust these people with money outside of work but will within the confines of work? Yeah, I'll just leave that as it is
right, which is why I mentioned things outside exposing his penis on the internet and that speak directly to his ability to perform his job. Amazing how that works, right?
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Attempts to deal with what? His personal sex life, right? Yep.
What are you talking about? That's all we're dealing with. If no one gave a rat's rear end about sex, it never would have been an issue. This situation/past situation is completely about his personal sex life, as was his response to it was about his sex life.
I honestly don't know how else to say this before you understand EVERYTHING controversial about this situation is related to his personal sex life.
And that trust should come from whether or not he is good at his job, not if he likes to show his penis to girls on the Internet.
Correct. People are not automated robots, they have different moods and even values depending on the situation they are in. A person who might cuss like a sailor in front of his friends wouldn't dare utter a four letter word around a child. A person who is a great risk taker on his own becomes a cautious driver when his wife is in the car. As situations change, people change. Trying to describe every aspect of a person based upon one aspect is silly.
No you didn't, you mentioned a situation which was directly related to exposing his penis on the Internet.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Is he going to spend half his working time defending from alleged scandals? Even if the allegations are false, that's not good for the city.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
1
Yes, publicly ...
You know, the attempts to deal with the scandal in the media and with his constituents. Things like press conferences, press releases, statements to the public.
No, there is a very clear public element to it.
Sending random women **** pics isn't simply sex, nor is it simply sexting.
You mean the response he addressed to the Public and that was presented in the public sphere? Right, so clearly we can draw from that his ability and integrity in dealing with the public
Well, maybe you'll need to learn to live with the fact you are wrong? Being that his dealings with the public clearly raise various questions about his competency and integrity
I just outlined how his handling of the situation speaks to his ability to perform his job.
Yes, publicly ...
You know, the attempts to deal with the scandal in the media and with his constituents. Things like press conferences, press releases, statements to the public.
No, there is a very clear public element to it.
Sending random women **** pics isn't simply sex, nor is it simply sexting.
You mean the response he addressed to the Public and that was presented in the public sphere? Right, so clearly we can draw from that his ability and integrity in dealing with the public
Well, maybe you'll need to learn to live with the fact you are wrong? Being that his dealings with the public clearly raise various questions about his competency and integrity
I just outlined how his handling of the situation speaks to his ability to perform his job.
Quag
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2012
- Messages
- 35,727
- Reaction score
- 18,653
- Location
- Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Honestly any public figure who isn't smart enough to figure out that doing what he did is a bad idea is probably not the guy I want in office. I don't so much about him being faithful to his wife but the stupidity of doing something in such an obviously moronic way leads me to wonder about his intellectual capacity to perform his duties.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2011
- Messages
- 10,090
- Reaction score
- 5,056
- Location
- wny
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
I'm OK with a flagrantly heterosexual horn dog for public office. Reminds me of myself in my youth. If you look at the various and sundry weasels we have in office, we have often done worse. I've never heard him say, "trust me." That's a good sign. His ol' lady likes him. That's a good sign. When the issue originally came up he publicly stated that "there might be more." That's a good sign. I hope he gets more ass than a public toilet and becomes a contented mayor.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Right...the scandal about his personal sex life. We can continue this forever, and you'll never be right.
Which revolved solely around his personal life. As a former Congressman, I'm sure he made many public appearances, dealt with many public issues. Those issues would have work related, and it is on those issues for which he should be judged. Judging him based on issues of his personal sex life is ridiculous.
But it's still sex related. It still comes back to the issue of sex.
I mean the response to the situation about his personal sex life, yes. No matter how often you use the word "public" it'll never change the fact we're talking about his private life.
I'll be wrong the moment the situation you're referring to was not about his private sex life. And since it will never not have been, I'll never be wrong.
What situation? The situation surrounding his private sex life? Got it.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
So his attempts to deal with something publicly prove that there was no public element to what we are discussing?
We just covered how I am not judging him on his personal sex life, but how he publicly handles a scandal. And his publicly handling of this scandal raised clearly legitimate questions about his competency and integrity.
You are free to ignore that and sell yourself on some idea that this only concerns his sex life, but there is a clear public element to this that directly related to his ability to effectively govern
First, your original standard was we were discussing his "personal" sex life and that it had no public element to it (both shown to be false). Second, going by your standard, someone flashing random people would be "just an issue of one's private sex life"
He was sending random women **** picks through a public medium. There is nothing personal about that
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2010
- Messages
- 22,676
- Reaction score
- 4,282
- Location
- DC Metro
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
And yet integrity means nothing concerning a position of trust?
It doesn't really have anything to do with his "sexual desires" to me. It's his integrity that's in question. If he can't be honest with, and uphold his promises to, his wife...why would he be honest to you?
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Of course integrity does. But integrity is far more than whether or not someone has sent naked pictures of themselves.
First of all, as I've mentioned, you don't know what his relationship with his wife is like. But, even if we assume it's the traditional relationship, it still has nothing to do with his job. If a man rode a motorcycle without a helmet in his free time, would you say he's unfit for public service because of his reckless disregard for safety? If a man moved to a new house and broke his rental release to do so, would you say he's unfit to hold public office because he's not a man of his word?
Simply focusing in on one aspect of a person, especially an aspect unrelated to his job, to determine if he's qualified for a job is silly. I'm not saying Weiner is qualified or that I'd vote for him, I'm simply saying that sending pictures of his genitals to people would not keep me from voting for him.
lolabird
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2013
- Messages
- 642
- Reaction score
- 114
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Take a good look at the picture and then say it wouldn't keep you from voting for him.
Carlos has a responsibility first and foremost to his family, and right now most everyone has seen his private parts, and they are making jokes about him. Someone, please think about his son.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Why would looking at his penis have anything to do with anything?
People making jokes about him means he cannot do his job well?
polisciguy
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2013
- Messages
- 396
- Reaction score
- 133
- Location
- Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I voted sure because the town I live in is quite small (about 1000 people). He'd run out of people to which to show his junk in no time.
lolabird
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2013
- Messages
- 642
- Reaction score
- 114
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
I could say a lot but I won't.
Having the world see his junk doesn't say much for him, now does it?
People making jokes about him means he doesn't make good decisions or good choices.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I literally have no idea what you're trying to get at. I get the feeling you believe you're making a point, but all I can see is that you're mentioning something that roughly half the country has between their legs.
I have absolutely no idea how you figure that.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Right, like misleading the public, how you treat your wife and child, willingness to drag your family through a public scandel, sending random people offensive images, being dumb enough to do so publicly, etc, etc, etc.
No, but we can all recognize that dragging her through a public scandal, repeatedly, is hardly being respectful.
Right, but if he repeatedly lied about issues surrounding "not wearing a helmet', in a laughingly false manner, we can surmise that 1) he has integrity issues and b) is rather incompetent
Well, yes, the man would be trusted with numerous key decisions daily, and I would hope that such decisions were made with a focus on careful examination and safety. Though if simply not wearing a helmet rises to that level, is certainly open for debate. And this comparison seems rather shaky, since you are comparing a personal decision to an event that has elements that go well beyond that
Dependes on the circumstances. Was this rental agreement broken in a manner that would call into question his integrity as both private citizen and public official, and would he attempt to handle the situation in a laughingly incompetent manner? If the answer to these questions is "yes" like the scandal under question, then yes, it would put his ability to govern in question
Again, you can freely ignore how this speaks to his ability to govern, but the points countering this have already been well detailed.
Right, but we are discussing him sending random women pictures on a public medium, his said competency in handling such, and how he has pulled into question his integrety as an individual and public figure
So this was just another false equivocation on your end
lolabird
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2013
- Messages
- 642
- Reaction score
- 114
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Why don't you ask your wife, girlfriend, partner or whatever how they would feel about you sending pictures of your junk to women and dickting with them.
Do you, as a professor, think Carlos Danger acted wisely? Did he make the right decision to send out graphic pictures of his junk after he apologized for lying the first time and then saying he would not repeat his bad behavior. I say bad behavior because there are two innocent people in the scenario; his wife and little boy.
You are right, we all have genitalia, but would you want your small children viewing Carlos' appendage?
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
It amazes me how persistent you are on being wrong. I'm not even going to bother to read the rest of your post, because I know I can ask one simple question you're incapable of answering in any way but one, the one way which proves my point.
Was this "scandal" about his personal life or was it job related? Until you can tell me it was job related, I don't need to read anything else from you.
I had a girlfriend once who would have been perfectly okay with it. In fact, she would have enjoyed the three of us getting together in person. I'm not really that kind of person, but she wouldn't have had a problem at all with it.
So how does that relate to your question?
No, he acted foolishly, but his actions were reflective of decisions made in his personal life, not his professional. I would not be voting for him to be Minister of Morality, I would be electing him to run my city.
There are many things I would not want my hypothetical children to do...one such thing would be to judge a man totally by his actions in one narrow aspect. I prefer my children be able to see beyond such a limited understanding of the world and realize people are multi-faceted and complex beings, and inefficiencies in one area do not automatically indicate inefficiencies in others.
To directly answer your question, no I would not, but at the same time, his penis has nothing to do with how well he might do his job.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
I already answered that (about a dozen times), and pointed out how he has handled the response to it speaks to his ability as a public figure and is clearly "job related". You have simply ignored that answer and have continued asking the same question. So i fail to see how it would prove me wrong.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Yes, and the answer is the same. It was about his private personal life. So as I said:
"Until you can tell me it was job related, I don't need to read anything else from you."
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2011
- Messages
- 12,895
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
right, which makes one wonder why you either don't address it, or at least acknowledge it. You know, as opposed to asking the same question over again and pretending I didn't already answer it
No, I just explained numerous times how it concerns more than his private personal life, even in the manner he shared the photos in question.
I already did numerous times. You simply ignore it