• 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!

If a woman had done what Scott Brown did...

Would a woman who posed nude win a senate seat?

  • Total voters
    47
Jerry said:
I don't care if he made gay porn; whatever it takes to defeat Obama'Care, I'm good with.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I'm glad he won. I don't care who poses nude, or why, or when. Makes no difference to me.

But that isn't what I was asking. Disregarding a candidate's politics, would a woman running for a senate seat have been raked over the coals considerably more than Brown was?
 
Jerry said:
I don't care if he made gay porn; whatever it takes to defeat Obama'Care, I'm good with.
Click to expand...

:rofl :rofl

If Ed Shultz is willing to vote 10 Times,... just to keep the guy out?

I hear ya,....

Unless the guy woke up last week with a dead kid naked in his bed,... I'd be tempted to vote him in, just to piss the leftards off.
 
Last edited:
rivrrat said:
I don't disagree. I'm glad he won. I don't care who poses nude, or why, or when. Makes no difference to me.

But that isn't what I was asking. Disregarding a candidate's politics, would a woman running for a senate seat have been raked over the coals considerably more than Brown was?
Click to expand...

Does she have a nice rack?
 
rivrrat said:
He is nude.
http://peoplemagazinedaily.com/wp-c...azine-cosmopolitan-republican-ted-kennedy.jpg
Click to expand...

But you don't see dong, which I think is a pretty big dividing line for a lot of people.

Someone who had pics like this: http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/scanner/2009/carrie-prejean-nude.jpg (mildly nsfw?) would get less of a reaction than someone who was straight up nude.

I didn't know Arnie posed nude. But the question still stands. Would a woman who did the same thing be elected? Or would she be scorned for it instead and made out to be some brainless whore for it? I'm leaning toward the latter, not that I agree with it though. I just don't see this country electing a woman who posed nude. I think they would rip her to shreds. However, a man doing the same thing and it's not an issue in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Yea, there's a pretty hilarious pic of it if you google image search it.

As to the rest, I think you're pretty spot on.
 
Jerry said:
Does she have a nice rack?
Click to expand...

I started to say "is there such a thing as a bad rack?"

And then I remembered seeing this one,...

babsnobra_seethru.jpg


Look out beloooowwwww!
 
Those of you who think it would be a big deal, let me ask you this question: What segment of the electorate would be so offended by a nude picture from 30 years prior that they would vote against the candidate (whom they otherwise would have supported)?

I assume you're thinking of the Religious Right...but even they are much more adaptable to a like-minded candidate than is commonly believed. They've supported candidates who have had affairs (McCain), candidates who have conceived outside of wedlock (Palin), and candidates with DUIs (Bush). And I don't say that as a put-down...I'm just illustrating that they can be more tolerant than you think if the candidate is otherwise in line with their views.

Would a nude picture from a candidate's youth really be beyond the pale?
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Those of you who think it would be a big deal, let me ask you this question: What segment of the electorate would be so offended by a nude picture from 30 years prior that they would vote against the candidate (whom they otherwise would have supported)?

I assume you're thinking of the Religious Right...but even they are much more adaptable to a like-minded candidate than is commonly believed. They've supported candidates who have had affairs (McCain), candidates who have conceived outside of wedlock (Palin), and candidates with DUIs (Bush). And I don't say that as a put-down...I'm just illustrating that they can be more tolerant than you think if the candidate is otherwise in line with their views.

Would a nude picture from a candidate's youth really be beyond the pale?
Click to expand...

I think there's a difference between knowing that a candidate did something bad in the past and staring it right in the chest.
 
RightinNYC said:
I think there's a difference between knowing that a candidate did something bad in the past and staring it right in the chest.
Click to expand...

The people who would be "staring it right in the chest" - instead of merely knowing about it - are probably not the people most likely to care about the candidate's moral values.
 
It depends on if she was hot or not.
 
forty years ago, I think it would be a career killer for national office for either gender, but it's less likely now, especially if the candidate simply stressed that they were young and dumb at the time.

Interestingly, It is much less of an issue in regional politics. I have a book, that I don't have at hand right now, so I forget the title. Late in the book are pictures of dignified, sweet looking, elderly ladies, pillars of the community, garden club presidents, library founders and the like as I recall, circa 1940. The book is about prostitutes in frontier Alaska.
 
It might matter in Alabama, but honestly I don't think enough people in Massachusetts would have cared. In fact, it might have helped her get the male youth vote....

EDIT: There were some rumors that Palin had posed nude for something once, but I don't think that anyone really gave a crap.
 
Last edited:
rivrrat said:
ala posing in a centerfold, do you think she would win a senate seat?
Click to expand...
I don't think she would but just because she did wouldn't mean that I wouldn't have voted for her. Now if it was a guy, well I might troubled by it. Especially cause scott brown is really hairy like the jungle you don't see what's beneath.
 
I would love to know. from what I can tell, in many ways the Us is an extremely prudish society.

Italy can have female porn stars in their parliament, but the US .... nah....
 
That's because sucking XXXX for money is best left to interns......:roll:
 
I think it'd depend where it was at first and foremost. Probably a better chance in New York or California than in Utah or Alabana.

After that I'd think the amount of time in between. If they just posted semi-nude/nude 5 years ago than no, but I think the same could be said (To a little lesser extent) for a guy.

However if it was something from 15-20 years ago I think they could get past it pretty easily.

I think it would be necessary for them to be still attractive however for it not to hurt. That said, I think that'd be the same requirement for a guy too.
 
They're a little less uptight about sex than we are, Dav. Levi didn't even show his Johnson.
 
Kandahar said:
I think that would hurt the fool who raised the issue a lot more than it would hurt the candidate who posed nude. I just can't envision an embarrassing picture eliciting much condemnation from anyone...not the voters, not the candidate's opponent, not even from the Christian Right. But I think that raising the issue WOULD elicit a lot of condemnation as it would be petty, misogynistic, and a cynical ploy for votes.

The voters can stomach a lot more than a racy picture.
Click to expand...

Of course, the CANDIDATE wouldn't bring up the issue, and would denounce those who did... thats what interest groups are for.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
They're a little less uptight about sex than we are, Dav. Levi didn't even show his Johnson.
Click to expand...

Poland? They are 90% Catholic, and priests have a huge say in politics. I somehow doubt that.

Besides, America isn't uniformly uptight; the uptightness just varies in each region. I suspect that Massachusetts voters wouldn't give two craps if a female politician had posed semi-nude once twenty years ago.
 
Dav said:
Poland? They are 90% Catholic, and priests have a huge say in politics. I somehow doubt that.

Besides, America isn't uniformly uptight; the uptightness just varies in each region. I suspect that Massachusetts voters wouldn't give two craps if a female politician had posed semi-nude once twenty years ago.
Click to expand...
Europe in general is less uptight about sex than America.
Poland included.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom