Politicians

Absolutely 100% it does. These men and women are trusted by the people who elect them to make very important decisions and to speak on their behalf if they cannot be honest about their own personal and private lives then how can they be trusted in their public lives.

As my old friend and retired work mate used to say the last person who went to parliment with a good idea was Guy Fawkes. They are a necessary evil but one who should not be, devious, secretive and disloyal which just about rules them all out.

Is it now a case of lowering our expectations? 

I often think that great politicians are by nature flawed in other areas..... 

It depends on what the politician does - if it is “normal” situation of, say, a failed marriage, then   I see no issue with it - they may have lied and cheated within the marriage, but that sadly seems to be the way of a lot of otherwise respectable people. If on the other hand that same issue has been compounded by abusing Pariamentary privilege, or uttering public lies, then that to me is a sign of more significant dishonesty. 

Arguably of course that is no worse than the other abysmal behaviour that seems to beset too large a proportion of elected politicians, a singificant number of whon I believe are quite unfit for office. There should be a better way of sacking MPs.

Well, we’re all human including politicians. We lie, we cheat, we take advantage. Nobody here can claim otherwise.

Some people, including a fair number of politicians really want to do good and improve the quality of life for as many as possible. Others are simply looking after themselves and possibly, a small section of society involving their friends.

Many, from either camp, are simply incompetent, despite their best intentions or their worst intentions.

I am struggling to name any that fall into the good and competent group. Perhaps others could help out ?

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, we’re all human including politicians. We lie, we cheat, we take advantage. Nobody here can claim otherwise.

Some people, including a fair number of politicians really want to do good and improve the quality of life for as many as possible. Others are simply looking after themselves and possibly, a small section of society involving their friends.

Many, from either camp, are simply incompetent, despite their best intentions or their worst intentions.

I am struggling to name any that fall into the good and competent group. Perhaps others could help out ?

 

 

While I agree with the first part of your post, I would argue that in every country there are a sizeable amount of the politicians are good, and a lesser part also competent. The base construction of democracy already makes it difficult for people to stray true as compromises need to be made to make progress.

So I would see they are human like all of us...

Bert, I agree with much of what you say, especially the bit about compromises. We all have to compromise from time to time, including politicians.

No doubt by tomorrow, this thread will be filled with a list of good, competent U.K. politicians.

We decide we like a politician...

because of their political views....and if we think their ideas are achievable....if they have the ability to compromise for the greater good ....and if we think they can motivate people so as to make a real difference to society 

Should their private life not stay private.... being divorced, separated, in an affair, gay, lesbian....reflect in any way on their ability  as a Politician?

Are expectations of those in the public eye seem to be somewhat dated and unrealistic....

It's completely wrong to excuse 'chequered' pasts or private lives as just being human, yes of course these are human frailties that we all are guilty of but a politician sets himself apart from the rest of us does he not.

I'm quite happy if they have 'normal' lives. Divorces, driving offences, a bit of weed at Uni etc etc. In fact I'd rather my politicians have a connection with the real world of some of the people they represent. Corruption, lying in office, abuse of power=goodbye.

I don't agree with Bob that somehow a politician sets themselves apart. Firstly they are elected, not self appointed. I think the best politicians are not exceptional in any general way but just have the skills and dedication to do their specific job well. No different to anyone who does their job well. Their have been some exceptional people in politics, but their are plenty in all walks of life. few of them have been entirely perfect. Churchill was an alcoholic with mental health problems after all!

Bruce

Jacob rees-mogg had an affair with queen Victoria. Hasn't done his popularity any harm.

Sorry Bruce but you are wrong how can they be elected if they do not set themselves apart from the rest of us by standing for election otherwise how do they convince us to vote for them and of course it's ok to have a divorce, a driving offence and to have smoked a bit of weed in their youth but that isn't whats being discussed here.

What I am talking about is secrecy, dishonesty and disloyalty be it with finances, for sexual gratification or for things of that nature not everyday human frailties. 

For instances a local business man puts himself up for election gets elected and a year in it's discovered he's been having an affair with his best friends wife and has a wife and three young children at home or has been found fiddling his taxes and his expenses or visiting male prostitutes whilst being outwardly hetrosexual, is that the kind of individual that you want representing you and your families interests.

I don't know the world you lot live in but in my world a divorce, some speeding fines and to have experimented with drugs isn't a somewhat chequered private life as the op put it it is normal life.

Elected politicians represent our interests at home and on the world stage and as such should be honest, reliable, unsecretive and loyal most importantly in their working life but also in their private life.

Actually Bob we are largely in agreement; dishonesty in office and corruption are unacceptable. I don't personally have an issue with someone failing to disclose their sexuality as I don't see this impacts on their probity or their ability to represent my views. Illegal acts are different.

We elect people to act as representatives and work in our locality as well as in Parliament. We don't elect them to be 'above us' but to do these specified jobs. Do they need to be perfect to do these things? Flawed people can still do them very well.

Bruce

wenger2015 posted:

Putting any political bias aside..... does the fact that many politicians have a somewhat checkered private life really matter anymore....??

Personally I couldn't care less about a politician (or any celebrity for that matter) personal life so long as one thing is kept in mind.  Whatever they do - so long as it is not illegal - is their own business UNLESS it is in contradiction to their public statements.  So (for example) a politician who speak about family values, then has an affair, has "lost" their right to privacy (IMO).

Its a case of separating what is "in the public interest" to know, vs what "interests the public".  Nothing private is in the public interest unless someone in the public eye is being a hypocrite.

Bob the Builder posted:

As my old friend and retired work mate used to say the last person who went to parliment with a good idea was Guy Fawkes. They are a necessary evil but one who should not be, devious, secretive and disloyal which just about rules them all out.

I have a real problem with this "canonisation" of Guy Fawkes.  It misses one important factor of Guy Fawkes (and is kind of the same being a hypocrite I mentioned above) - Guy Fawkes wasn't looking to bring down the king and parliament to give "the people" power, he didn't want to bring down the establishment as many people think; he simply thought the "wrong" establishment was in power.

The last sort of person who should ever be allow to hold power is anyone who seeks power.

Huge posted:

The last sort of person who should ever be allow to hold power is anyone who seeks power.

Without power, you are very limited in what you can achieve, so seeking power for good is obviously a different matter.....

So I wonder regarding Boris ‘had a few affairs’ Johnson...... is he PM material or more Buffoon??

 

Bob the Builder posted:

As my old friend and retired work mate used to say the last person who went to parliment with a good idea was Guy Fawkes. They are a necessary evil but one who should not be, devious, secretive and disloyal which just about rules them all out.

I have a real problem with this "canonisation" of Guy Fawkes.  It misses one important factor of Guy Fawkes (and is kind of the same being a hypocrite I mentioned above) - Guy Fawkes wasn't looking to bring down the king and parliament to give "the people" power, he didn't want to bring down the establishment as many people think; he simply thought the "wrong" establishment was in power.

I've just been laughing to myself for about  at the thought of the look on Dai's face (my old work mate who used to say that about Guy Fawkes) if I'd said that to him.

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Actually Bob we are largely in agreement; dishonesty in office and corruption are unacceptable. I don't personally have an issue with someone failing to disclose their sexuality as I don't see this impacts on their probity or their ability to represent my views. Illegal acts are different.

We elect people to act as representatives and work in our locality as well as in Parliament. We don't elect them to be 'above us' but to do these specified jobs. Do they need to be perfect to do these things? Flawed people can still do them very well.

Bruce

No they don't need to be perfect just honest and don't cherry pick parts of statements I have made (are you sure your not a politician Bruce) I didn't say I have problem with someone not disclosing their sexuality what I said I had a problem with was in this case a man but it could also be a woman being outwardly hetrosexual or gay, married with children and then visting prostitutes and not being honest about their sexuality and being secretive and disloyal to their partners and too their children because if an individual is capable of that then he is capable of other dishonest acts that make not suitable to represent the views of anyone.

wenger2015 posted:

So I wonder regarding Boris ‘had a few affairs’ Johnson...... is he PM material or more Buffoon??

Buffoon through and through, not an ounce of credibility since the Brexit stand-down, absolutely no diplamatic skills (and he mas made foreign sec!), and very evidently only interested in himself.

or by PM did you mean posruring madman?

Innocent Bystander posted:

wenger2015 posted:

So I wonder regarding Boris ‘had a few affairs’ Johnson...... is he PM material or more Buffoon??

Buffoon through and through, not an ounce of credibility since the Brexit stand-down, absolutely no diplamatic skills (and he mas made foreign sec!), and very evidently only interested in himself.

or by PM did you mean posruring madman?

Agree completely....May’s job is safe for now

The Op asked "Putting any political bias aside..... does the fact that many politicians have a somewhat checkered private life really matter anymore....??'

And almost inevitably we end up at Johnson but I think the playing away sort of MP can belong to any party - think Robin Cook, Paddy Pantsdown, John Profumo - with the exception of maybe the SNP with Jimmie Crankie at the helm. No amount of money on make-overs could make her attractive, I defer to Belosconnies remark in relation to the German PM.

If specifically considering marital fidelity, then I would observe that the most respectable in society, and the otherwise most trustworthy of people, have always included those who fall down in that respect. Possibly the use of prostitutes is not much different, though less likely to become known. When it comes to affairs of the heart, or rather loins, it seems there are few who can’t  be tempted, and that does not relate to their integrity in other areas. What is more of a tell of character, however, is how people behave when found out.