Hypothetical Question Involving Anthony Weiner

Would you still consider a candidate who wrote to Anthony Weiner when he was in prison & dated him?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

BussyPhilipps

Worshipped Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Posts
5,647
Media
0
Likes
12,037
Points
183
Location
Fucking (Upper Austria, Austria)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
This question is inspired by the Elle Magazine article that went viral about the journalist who fell in love with Martin Shkreli:

If it were exposed that a political candidate wrote to Anthony Weiner while he was in prison and formed a pen-pal relationship with him, and then had a short-lived romantic relationship with him once he got out of prison, would that be a dealbreaker for you? Do you think it’s important that a politician has demonstrated good judgment, even in their personal life, and would you hold an example of extremely poor judgment against a candidate? Why or why not?
 

njfellow2002

Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Posts
998
Media
0
Likes
1,511
Points
323
Location
New Jersey (United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
You are asking a lot in your question and description. Bottom line is we need to feel comfortable with our elected officals judgement and alliances always. It is the old 'slippery slope' question. What would motivate this relationship, for example. Writing to someone and dating them are different also. I'd need to know the content of the written correspondence. Was it before/during/after candidates decision to run? Generally speaking, I think any of the above shows poor judgement (if for romantic purposes, as opposed to say review of his case)-and I would not vote for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BussyPhilipps

BussyPhilipps

Worshipped Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Posts
5,647
Media
0
Likes
12,037
Points
183
Location
Fucking (Upper Austria, Austria)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
You are asking a lot in your question and description. Bottom line is we need to feel comfortable with our elected officals judgement and alliances always. It is the old 'slippery slope' question. What would motivate this relationship, for example. Writing to someone and dating them are different also. I'd need to know the content of the written correspondence. Was it before/during/after candidates decision to run? Generally speaking, I think any of the above shows poor judgement (if for romantic purposes, as opposed to say review of his case)-and I would not vote for them.
Let’s say the woman wrote to him while he was in prison because she found him interesting and wanted to know more about his politics, but then as the pen-pal relationship developed, she fell in love with him and started dating him once he got out of prison.

And let’s also say that the relationship ended a few months before she decided to run for office.
 

njfellow2002

Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Posts
998
Media
0
Likes
1,511
Points
323
Location
New Jersey (United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Let’s say the woman wrote to him while he was in prison because she found him interesting and wanted to know more about his politics, but then as the pen-pal relationship developed, she fell in love with him and started dating him once he got out of prison.

And let’s also say that the relationship ended a few months before she decided to run for office.

Based on that preface, no, I would not vote for her. I could not trust her judgement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BussyPhilipps

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male

I hadn't given it any thought at all. Too many variables. Depends on what the person is incarcerated for, the particulars of the romance, the political views of either, the degree of remorse/rehabilitation of the offender, the importance of the candidate's philosophy, ideology, political positions over that of another's etc. etc. Each situation would be different.

As another posted above, at the end of.... (sht... I HATE that phrase) WHEN ALL'S SAID AND DONE, a voter needs to feel comfortable with a candidate's judgment, sense of propriety, behavior, ideology, political positions AND associates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deleted15807

BussyPhilipps

Worshipped Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Posts
5,647
Media
0
Likes
12,037
Points
183
Location
Fucking (Upper Austria, Austria)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I hadn't given it any thought at all. Too many variables. Depends on what the person is incarcerated for, the particulars of the romance, the political views of either, the degree of remorse/rehabilitation of the offender, the importance of the candidate's philosophy, ideology, political positions over that of another's etc. etc. Each situation would be different.

As another posted above, at the end of.... (sht... I HATE that phrase) WHEN ALL'S SAID AND DONE, a voter needs to feel comfortable with a candidate's judgment, sense of propriety, behavior, ideology, political positions AND associates.
Let’s just say the candidate who wrote to Anthony Weiner when he was in prison and then proceeded to date him is a progressive candidate in a Democratic primary. Would that recent history with Weiner be a dealbreaker for you because of their poor judgment and you would consider the other Democratic candidates instead, or would you still consider this candidate if you liked their platform and policy proposals?
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Let’s just say the candidate who wrote to Anthony Weiner when he was in prison and then proceeded to date him is a progressive candidate in a Democratic primary. Would that recent history with Weiner be a dealbreaker for you because of their poor judgment and you would consider the other Democratic candidates instead, or would you still consider this candidate if you liked their platform and policy proposals?

Offhand I'd say it'd be a dealbreaker.

But GENERALLY speaking, I also have written on numerous occasions that there IS no perfect candidate. Just a better choice.

Supposing for instance a candidate's opponent was an advocate for locking away migrant youth in cages, snatching them from families without contact information or intent to reunite them, supported deporting Dreamers, cutting child nutrition benefits and services, opposed healthcare coverage for young members of families and those with pre-existing conditions, and supported reducing welfare and food benefits, and cutting planning services for women and families...

what if he or she advocated for establishing death penalties by hanging or firing squad, opposed legislation prohibiting discrimination against young transgendered people and supported so-called bullshit "conversion therapies"...

or opposed reallocation of community funds from militarized police forces to community outreach and mentoring services that might help provide ways and guidance out of poverty and criminal influences...

what if he or she supported discriminatory practices in lending and housing, supported efforts to strip consumers' protections from predatory lenders and rob consumers of legal recourse (via so-called "tort reform") from corporate negligence and fraud...

what if that person denied the realities of the pandemic, obstructed the dissemination of information, put out false statements, opposed sound medical advice, and otherwise encouraged asinine actions that endangered individuals and the community at large,

what if he or she supported reductions to environmental regulations that'd protect families, particularly in poorer neighborhoods, from having to breath polluted-ass air or drink dirty-ass water...

(and hey, don't think I'm going off on you. I'm just gettin pissed thinking about all the underhanded, spiteful, retrogressive, EVIL s------ many on the right have supported - legislation that has done HARM to many, while obstructing that which could've been of benefit to millions).

In short. what if that opponent was a person who, by virtue of his or her ideology and policies, was capable of a MILLION atrocities?

On past occasion, I wrote of how once upon a time in Louisiana, voters were presented with two choices for governor. The slogan was, "the klansman or the crook."



 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dreamer20

BussyPhilipps

Worshipped Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Posts
5,647
Media
0
Likes
12,037
Points
183
Location
Fucking (Upper Austria, Austria)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Offhand I'd say it'd be a dealbreaker.

But GENERALLY speaking, I also have written on numerous occasions that there IS no perfect candidate. Just a better choice.

Supposing for instance a candidate's opponent was an advocate for locking away migrant youth in cages, snatching them from families without contact information or intent to reunite them, supported deporting Dreamers, cutting child nutrition benefits and services, opposed healthcare coverage for young members of families and those with pre-existing conditions, and supported reducing welfare and food benefits, and cutting planning services for women and families...

what if he or she advocated for establishing death penalties by hanging or firing squad, opposed legislation prohibiting discrimination against young transgendered people and supported so-called bullshit "conversion therapies"...

or opposed reallocation of community funds from militarized police forces to community outreach and mentoring services that might help provide ways and guidance out of poverty and criminal influences...

what if he or she supported discriminatory practices in lending and housing, supported efforts to strip consumers' protections from predatory lenders and rob consumers of legal recourse (via so-called "tort reform") from corporate negligence and fraud...

what if that person denied the realities of the pandemic, obstructed the dissemination of information, put out false statements, opposed sound medical advice, and otherwise encouraged asinine actions that endangered individuals and the community at large,

what if he or she supported reductions to environmental regulations that'd protect families, particularly in poorer neighborhoods, from having to breath polluted-ass air or drink dirty-ass water...

(and hey, don't think I'm going off on you. I'm just gettin pissed thinking about all the underhanded, spiteful, retrogressive, EVIL s------ many on the right have supported - legislation that has done HARM to many, while obstructing that which could've been of benefit to millions).

In short. what if that opponent was a person who, by virtue of his or her ideology and policies, was capable of a MILLION atrocities?

On past occasion, I wrote of how once upon a time in Louisiana, voters were presented with two choices for governor. The slogan was, "the klansman or the crook."



Those are good points in the context of a general election, but in a Democratic primary, I hope that none of the candidates would support any of the terrible policies or positions you mentioned.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Those are good points in the context of a general election, but in a Democratic primary, I hope that none of the candidates would support any of the terrible policies or positions you mentioned.

Well, originally you didn't specify that the question pertained just to Democrats or a Democratic primary, though, when you tagged five members here, and only left leaning ones, I guess I should've caught the drift.

The POINT of my reply was that candidates on the right have ALREADY supported the terrible positions I mentioned -

including the self-professed pussy-grabber-in chief, who not only was once accused of underaged rape (by a person who just sort of upped and disappeared) but also accused of sexual assault by about two dozen women, and reportedly walked in on young beauty contestants in various states of undress, to which when complained about, his own daughter explained, "yes he does that."

Still, in spite of the above, and all the SHIT he's done, said, and pulled SINCE, his GOP enablers are lining up to assist him in a fkng military COUP, and some his sycophants are even ready to die for him. Meanwhile Democrats are in a stew about which Biden nominee is best for which position.

So when someone asks me that kind of question (and seeing as I'm the only one who bothered to answer at length) -

GENERALLY speaking, I think Democrats need to get our heads out from our asses a bit and STOP BRINGING KNIVES TO A GUNFIGHT.

 
  • Like
Reactions: dreamer20

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
This question is inspired by the Elle Magazine article that went viral about the journalist who fell in love with Martin Shkreli:

If it were exposed that a political candidate wrote to Anthony Weiner while he was in prison and formed a pen-pal relationship with him, and then had a short-lived romantic relationship with him once he got out of prison, would that be a dealbreaker for you? Do you think it’s important that a politician has demonstrated good judgment, even in their personal life, and would you hold an example of extremely poor judgment against a candidate? Why or why not?

Weiner’s political career is over because of “extremely poor judgment” (not to mention criminal behavior) in his personal life. But if some hypothetical Democratic candidate still saw something worthwhile in Weiner, and cared enough about him to date him, I don’t know that I would consider that a deal breaker—not without knowing more about the circumstances.

It’s probably a moot point, though, since guilt by association would mostly likely sink that candidate’s campaign from the start.
 

BussyPhilipps

Worshipped Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Posts
5,647
Media
0
Likes
12,037
Points
183
Location
Fucking (Upper Austria, Austria)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Weiner’s political career is over because of “extremely poor judgment” (not to mention criminal behavior) in his personal life. But if some hypothetical Democratic candidate still saw something worthwhile in Weiner, and cared enough about him to date him, I don’t know that I would consider that a deal breaker—not without knowing more about the circumstances.

It’s probably a moot point, though, since guilt by association would mostly likely sink that candidate’s campaign from the start.
For me it would be a dealbreaker because I think choosing to date a convicted sex offender indicates extremely poor judgment, just like that female journalist who fell in love with Martin Shkreli showed incredibly poor judgment with her choices. Falling in love with a criminal in prison when there are literally billions of other potential suitors on the planet is crazy behavior, imo, no matter the initial reasons for writing to that person while they’re in prison.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
For me it would be a dealbreaker because I think choosing to date a convicted sex offender indicates extremely poor judgment, just like that female journalist who fell in love with Martin Shkreli showed incredibly poor judgment with her choices. Falling in love with a criminal in prison when there are literally billions of other potential suitors on the planet is crazy behavior, imo, no matter the initial reasons for writing to that person while they’re in prison.

From a political standpoint, it no doubt is poor judgment, because an overwhelming number of people would rule out that candidate from the start. I just don't happen to be one of them.
 

ActionBuddy

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Posts
13,722
Media
15
Likes
30,486
Points
618
Location
Seattle, Washington, US
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Frankly speaking, since it is not about real politics, I find this "hypothetical question" thread to be far-reaching and rather silly.

This thread should be moved to the Relationships, Discrimination, and Jealousy Forum, rather than remain here, wasting time and space, in the Politics Forum.

A/B
 
Last edited: