Does character matter?

[Danestress]

To you personally as a voter? How about to your Dh?

 

Let's not argue about what actions are wrong or bad. According to your *own* personal standards of decent conduct, does knowledge of a politician violating those standards affect they way you vote?

 

If you found out that a candidate you liked lied to a potential employer, do you care? How about if he stole from an employer? Refused to pay child support? Forged a signature on a check? Committed adultery? Threatened a neighbor? Lied about military service? If you think any or all of those things are "wrong" would you care that a politician did them, or do they seem like private matters to you?

 

Without going into specific circumstances (I know there is a lot of news floating around!) do you think, in a general way, that information about a candidate lying, cheating, stealing, womanizing, abusing alcohol, neglecting his children is purely a "private" matter and none of our business, or do you think these things are relevant to voters? And do you think it's a news organizations job to report on these things, or do you think it's gossip mongering?

[Gretchen in NJ]

Character is very important to me.

[MindyD]

Yes and no. Yes, I think character matters. I don't buy into the whole compartmentalization of people. You can't put part of yourself in a box, and make choices with a different part. If a person is liar in their personal life, why will they be any different in their public life. BUT, I don't want to see all the sordid details all over the news. It crosses a line from giving information to salivating at every.single.juicy.detail. So yes it matters to me, but no, I don't want to see it every single time I try to watch the news.

[Amy in NH]

Yes. It matters.

[twoforjoy]

For me, it would really depend on a few things. I don't expect anybody to be perfect, and there are many things I'd be willing to overlook. But anything that related directly to the job they were doing (like if they'd been dishonest in their business/government practices in the past) or that directly contradicted their platform would bother me. I'm going to judge a candidate running on a "family values" platform a lot more harshly for having had an affair or having divorced a spouse than I would a candidate who did the same thing but didn't make that part of their platform. So I guess it bothers me more when somebody's private actions contradict their public profession of morals.

[AngelBee]

Character is very important to me.

:iagree:

However, I am also very forgiving depending on the situation. If canidate is open and honest about a mistake and takes responsibility for it, I am ok.

 

If they lie, I will not respect nor vote for them.

[SailorMom]

To a certain extent, I suppose. True criminal activity would stop me from voting for a person. However, bad personal choices and cruddy personal behavior would not. I don't need a saint, just someone with some common sense regarding issues that are affecting the US. I will add a caveat: racism. Can't abide by it at all.

[regentrude]

Very important.

How can you trust a liar or thief to fulfill his office for his constituents?

(This said: marital issues are more complicated - so I would have no problem with a divorced candidate.)

But lying about military service for instance would absolutely be a dealbreaker.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Many of the character issues you stated would be grounds for firing from a private company (the truth issues esp.) I think they should be grounds for firing or not hiring (ie. voting for) a public servant.

[Impish]

Many of the character issues you stated would be grounds for firing from a private company (the truth issues esp.) I think they should be grounds for firing or not hiring (ie. voting for) a public servant.

:iagree:Electing someone is choosing them as your rep. Someone with the morals of an alley cat isn't representative of me.

[Hankins3]

I think that it matters. Character is one of the greatest things that I can try to teach my son. That being said, we are all human, and I only know of one perfect man who has walked the face of this earth. I make mistakes. Others make mistakes. Each situation is personal and different. I like to think that I make good decisions, but when I make a bad one, I pray it is not held against me forever... and since in my own personal life I have Jesus, it won't be, at least where it matters most.

 

As for a politician, sometimes they slip. If it is a one time thing and there are no other signs, I might be tempted to give them the benefit of the doubt and vote, depending upon the severity of the action. Now, if there was a pattern established of this type of behavior, without a doubt and without question, I would not vote them in nor vote to keep them in. Once that is done, my part in it is over and they need to get back to their own problems...and me back to mine. :)

[kalanamak]

 

If you found out that a candidate you liked lied to a potential employer, do you care? How about if he stole from an employer? Refused to pay child support? Forged a signature on a check? Committed adultery? Threatened a neighbor? Lied about military service? If you think any or all of those things are "wrong" would you care that a politician did them, or do they seem like private matters to you?

 

 

I have much less issue with adultery than flagrancy. Or divorcing when the spouse is sick or in need or became less "useful".

 

The money and lying issues are big to me.

 

As long as a person was fairly moderate (we have a big, varied country to govern), I look at personality FIRST. I don't want a hot head who'll rush to war, I don't want a dumbo who will make the US look like slumps, I don't want a sleepy-vacationy person. I want a calm, sensible, wise, experienced, diligent, mature human who doesn't arrive in office owing a lot of favors. I care less about specific politics.

 

And I know it seems un-PC and undemocratic, but I think they will have to have some charm and smooth words to get the hoi poloi behind them.

[JennyD]

I have changed my thinking about this over the years. The more I have learned about various officials, both historical and present, the more it seems to me as though moral rectitude doesn't correlate all that well to political effectiveness and/or good leadership. Which frankly, I find kind of disturbing and baffling -- you'd think that there'd be more of a relationship between the two, and can I really vote for someone I find personally reprehensible? -- but I'm starting to think that character is something of a red herring.

[Ester Maria]

Professionally, the only thing that I care about is professionality. Obviously, that will eliminate some types of fraud and character issues with people, to an extent, but certainly not all of that. I am one of those who are able to compartmentalize. I can consider somebody a killer lawyer, professor, public office servant, doctor, president, you name it, yet at the same time I can consider them a morally wretched person whom I would not wish to associate personally. That is fine, as we do not have to associate personally and for our common goals, whatever those are, I can associate with them, vote for them (based exclusively on their program and likelihood of them adhering to it), work with them.

 

I try to be maximally fair with each person and in doing so I try to estimate what concerns me and what does not. Alcoholizing, womanizing, divorce, etc. is not my business. Some law breaking issues (such as stealing) would be a lot more difficult to just overlook, but there are many things which I would overlook without thinking twice. I am not marrying that person to profoundly care, and we can often work together for a common interest.

 

I do not even feel particularly competent in moralizing (to anyone), honestly. Their private life is their business, as long as it does not include truly severe or legal issues. Whenever I see the amount of media nonsense and competition in who can obtain the most juicy details on public figures it makes me feel sick. The journalist profession has sunk VERY low and that itself is more despicable to me than most "sins" people have, because it creates a very nosy and unhealthy public atmosphere. Somebody whose "sins" are not very legally problematic or affecting his professionality and presentability as a representative is perfectly fine with me, even if he is the type of person I would not personally hang out with.

[Meriwether]

Absolutely. If the choice is between two scum buckets, though, I'll vote for the one who aligns the closest to me politically.

[Abigail4476]

Yes, it matters, but elections sometimes boil down to picking the lesser of two evils. :glare: In that case, I'll pick the person I think can do a better job, even if there's something about them I don't like. Or I might pick one person because I simply don't want the other one in office.

[Barb_]

Professionally, the only thing that I care about is professionality. Obviously, that will eliminate some types of fraud and character issues with people, to an extent, but certainly not all of that. I am one of those who are able to compartmentalize. I can consider somebody a killer lawyer, professor, public office servant, doctor, president, you name it, yet at the same time I can consider them a morally wretched person whom I would not wish to associate personally.

 

:iagree: Yes, exactly. Furthermore, I think it takes a certain type of personality to go into politics or really any type of leadership position that puts one on display for daily tightrope walks. It takes guts and a certain amount of arrogance. So I'm never surprised when these guys (and it is usually guys) think they walk on water in their personal lives.

 

Barb

[pdalley]

:iagree:

However, I am also very forgiving depending on the situation. If canidate is open and honest about a mistake and takes responsibility for it, I am ok.

 

If they lie, I will not respect nor vote for them.

 

 

:iagree:

[FrogMom5]

Character matters to me. I can forgive some things, maybe an affair during a rough patch or something. But, you mentioned neglecting a child or abuse - no, those are deal breakers for me. Lying, cheating, stealing to get votes, I don't like those things either.

Denise

[In2why]

Hypocrisy is more of a deal breaker then character to me. If you make laws based on *your values, you better darn sure live by those values. For example I didn't care about Clinton's affair while President or even the fact that he lied about it afterwards, but John Edwards on the other hand used his family and wife at every opportunity to point out what a great family man we was, and that to me is a deal breaker.

President G.W. Bush being in the Air National Guard (barely) doesn't bother me, but VP Dick Cheney requesting 5 deferments and them being VERY pro-war, results in a loss of credibility for me.

As for Arnold.....no biggie to me...he always was a hound, and everyone has always known it, same as with Clinton, and having a child outside of his marriage doesn't make is any better or worse. But as a wife I can only imagine the pain his wife must feel, not just about the child, but rather the fact that the mistress worked with the family for all that time, and probably had a friendly relationship. That makes the personal betrayal even worse in my book.

[chiguirre]

Ethics violations and lying about their resume are deal breakers for me. They make me distrust the person's capacity to do the job of legislator, judge or executive. I don't care as much about their partying, philandering or youthful indiscretions as long as I think they will not overindulge to the point that it impares their capacity to do their job. The one exception to that is when a politician has been proven to be a hypocrite, that really irks me for some reason. If you're gonna sling mud, you better be squeaky clean!

[In2why]

Absolutely. If the choice is between two scum buckets, though, I'll vote for the one who aligns the closest to me politically.

 

 

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this post, but some elections it really does feel like this is the choice.

[redsquirrel]

I can't stand hypocrisy. If you are putting yourself out there as a "family values guy" or a "by the books" guy then you better walk the walk. Especially if you have ever judged others. That really, really bothers me.

[Liz CA]

Character is very important to me.

 

Yes, Yes and Yes again. I am rather disappointed that Schwarzenegger turned out to be that kind of Jerk! :glare:

[elizabeth]

I just posted the following on my fb page regarding the behaviour of my in laws and an alcoholic in the family. Hell yes character matters to me.

Here is my fb post.

There are many times when it is an insult to be avoided or treated as if you are not a part of the family. In my case ,it is a sign of having a brain that works. A healthy brain and mind do not tolerate codependence, secrecy and false faces. Thank you to my parents who raised me to have a well formed conscience and a spine. Just keeping it real because I value forthrightness. I may stand alone but I can smile at the face in the mirror.

 

And I know many of the people here know exactly where I am coming from.

Edited May 19, 2011 by elizabeth
spelling

[Sparkle]

Yes, character is very important to me. Why would I support someone, even tacitly, who exhibits immoral behavior? I'm not talking about honest mistakes or minor transgressions. But if someone has a pattern of misbehavior or big moral errors, yes, that would definitely bother me.

[WishboneDawn]

Character is important but character to me doesn't mean a blemish or trouble-free life. It may mean major mistakes were made but the person dealt with them responsibly.

[Daisy]

Absolutely.

 

Character is important but character to me doesn't mean a blemish or trouble-free life. It may mean major mistakes were made but the person dealt with them responsibly.

 

I agree with this. Though some major mistakes would be enough to disqualify you from office, imo.

[kalanamak]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this post, but some elections it really does feel like this is the choice.

 

I recall the bumpersticker when David Duke ran against Edwin Edwards: Vote for the Crook. It's Important.

[simka2]

Professionally, the only thing that I care about is professionality. Obviously, that will eliminate some types of fraud and character issues with people, to an extent, but certainly not all of that. I am one of those who are able to compartmentalize. I can consider somebody a killer lawyer, professor, public office servant, doctor, president, you name it, yet at the same time I can consider them a morally wretched person whom I would not wish to associate personally. That is fine, as we do not have to associate personally and for our common goals, whatever those are, I can associate with them, vote for them (based exclusively on their program and likelihood of them adhering to it), work with them.

 

 

I do not even feel particularly competent in moralizing (to anyone), honestly. Their private life is their business, as long as it does not include truly severe or legal issues. Whenever I see the amount of media nonsense and competition in who can obtain the most juicy details on public figures it makes me feel sick. The journalist profession has sunk VERY low and that itself is more despicable to me than most "sins" people have, because it creates a very nosy and unhealthy public atmosphere. Somebody whose "sins" are not very legally problematic or affecting his professionality and presentability as a representative is perfectly fine with me, even if he is the type of person I would not personally hang out with.

 

Especially the bolded. If I need brain surgery, I want the best surgeon available....regardless of his personal issues.

 

Character matters to me. I can forgive some things, maybe an affair during a rough patch or something. But, you mentioned neglecting a child or abuse - no, those are deal breakers for me. Lying, cheating, stealing to get votes, I don't like those things either.

Denise

 

This as well, mainly because I hate the way it undermines the peoples voice.

[Rosie_0801]

I hate it when political opponents scream about a politician changing their mind on an issue when they are being upfront about it. "JH said he would never, ever support a GST and now he's proposing one! The liar! The Big Fat Liar!" Knock it off already. He said that 15 years ago. Who hasn't changed their mind on an issue in the last 15 years? Apply yourself to thinking of a better plan, or something useful, why don't you?

 

I most definitely don't like hypocrisy. I don't care if a politician was promiscuous in his youth, but he'd better not be spouting the family values line if he's cheated on his wife. Don't break laws. I expect you to pay the minimum amount of tax you can legally get away with, but don't pay less than that, a don't drink drive. For goodness sakes, don't tell journalists that you can't be trusted unless your words have been put into writing. Doing that while also playing the good Christian line is way too funny. You won't get my vote if you can't even pretend to take your job seriously...

 

Rosie

Edited May 19, 2011 by Rosie_0801

[Anne]

Character absolutely matters - absolutely. Past mistakes might not prevent me from voting for someone, depending on how long ago the mistake(s) occurred, and how the candidate handled them. I'm looking for honesty and integrity - not perfection.

 

Anne

[Rosy]

Professionally, the only thing that I care about is professionality. Obviously, that will eliminate some types of fraud and character issues with people, to an extent, but certainly not all of that. I am one of those who are able to compartmentalize. I can consider somebody a killer lawyer, professor, public office servant, doctor, president, you name it, yet at the same time I can consider them a morally wretched person whom I would not wish to associate personally. That is fine, as we do not have to associate personally and for our common goals, whatever those are, I can associate with them, vote for them (based exclusively on their program and likelihood of them adhering to it), work with them.

 

I try to be maximally fair with each person and in doing so I try to estimate what concerns me and what does not. Alcoholizing, womanizing, divorce, etc. is not my business. Some law breaking issues (such as stealing) would be a lot more difficult to just overlook, but there are many things which I would overlook without thinking twice. I am not marrying that person to profoundly care, and we can often work together for a common interest.

 

I do not even feel particularly competent in moralizing (to anyone), honestly. Their private life is their business, as long as it does not include truly severe or legal issues. Whenever I see the amount of media nonsense and competition in who can obtain the most juicy details on public figures it makes me feel sick. The journalist profession has sunk VERY low and that itself is more despicable to me than most "sins" people have, because it creates a very nosy and unhealthy public atmosphere. Somebody whose "sins" are not very legally problematic or affecting his professionality and presentability as a representative is perfectly fine with me, even if he is the type of person I would not personally hang out with.

:iagree: I couldn't have said it better.