Why do people care about the personal lives of polititians?

Do they want to elect people that are systematically better than them at everything for the posts? Isn't this kinda demanding?

"Sweets are good. Sweets are justice."

Same reason why we pay undue attention to celebrities, actors and actresses, singers and rich folk:

They're famous, somehow.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

There's a difference between harmless gossip and losing elections and one's livelihood because of that.

"Sweets are good. Sweets are justice."

Because in politics, private lives are all we're allowed to talk about or have input on anymore.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

I'd argue that some of those other famous people have their lives ruined, in a sense, by all the attention. I'd absolutely loathe to be under microscope all the time, with the papparazi following me around and posting unflattering pictures of me on tabloids, and rumors flying around about who I talked with, what I drive, where I live and people hanging onto every word I say as some sort of Really Important Stuff.

(not that I'm much to look at anyway.)

edited 10th Mar '11 9:55:14 AM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

Bread and circuses, man. It excites people and keeps them from thinking about things that matter, and the media profits.

Groovy.

Well if a politician campaigns on "family values" and "defense of marriage", finding out that they've, say divorced their wife while she was dying of cancer, might be a reason to not elect them.

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play

Harmless gossip... yeah right.

I hate gossip mags, personal anecdotes and general interference with private lives with a vengeance. Short of outright abuse, the personal lives of people, famous or not, should be sacrosanct. I want people judging our politicians by the job they do; there's enough meat to tear into there, and when I see someone reading a gossip mag, there's a strong part of me that wants to seize it, tear it into pieces, set it on fire, urinate on it for good measure and then publicly berate the person for the intrusion. And as for the journalists and editors who write this crap... anyone got a torch and pitchfork I can borrow?

Casual death threats to almost the whole of the journalistic body at some point in their career aside, I really despise this.

The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.

Storyyeller: Yes. How honest and forthright and trustworthy is this guy running for office? can I expect him or her to represent me fairly? I could care less that Tom Cruise is a complete nutjob, for example - it doesn't detract from his acting ability. But if he was to run for office...? Different story.

^ and yeah, gossip rags aren't even good enough for use as toilet paper.

edited 10th Mar '11 9:58:26 AM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

For the same reason we don't vote for atheists.

Care to elaborate? That sounds like an interesting theory.

The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.

^^

Because you're all completely opposed to the idea of having an unbiased presidency that focuses on common sense and not enforcing a specific moral worldview on the entire nation in the stead of focusing on important issues?

Sorry, just getting really tired of social issues being more important than fiscal ones as a former Republican. Why am I a former Republican? Christians.

I like you Penguin, which is why I held back on any comments about you being fucking insane. This is my apology for that remark in advance. [sad]

edited 10th Mar '11 10:04:48 AM by Barkey

Because "Character matters". We assume that a person who is of poor character in one aspect of their lives are of poor character in other parts of their lives. (Atheists are just assumed to be of poor character because the common belief is that it's religion that makes one of good character)

The problem is the influence that modern religion has had on our culture has resulted in a society where having an affair is seen is a moral travesty, but laying off a tenth or two of your workforce to increase your profits is seen as business as usual.

Edit: I actually do think that character matters. I think that people with poor character tropes generally have other poor character tropes. I just happen to think that being ye olde moral guardian is a poor character trope, and that's why we see this sort of thing happen all the time.

edited 10th Mar '11 10:09:28 AM by Karmakin

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

Honestly, this one does not care about personal lives of most politicians. But if the politician in question makes a point of imposing their version of morality upon everyone, "family values", show of piousness, playing Moral Guardian and so on, then their inability to live according to what they profess becomes a valid reason for criticism.

Similarly, this one does not care if politician wears fur or drives an expensive, powerful and very polluting car - unless the politician in question identifies as green. Then it is a legitimate problem.

So, this one has zero interest in personal lives, but abhors hypocrisy.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

If it can be used against a politician, it will. If that happens to be something in their personal lives, well, sucks to be them.

EDIT: come to think of it, isn't there one atheist politician? That was awhile ago but he might still be around.

edited 10th Mar '11 10:09:36 AM by thatguythere47

Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?

And that is one of the things that disgusts me about todays society. We are so fucked up...

The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.

^^In the US there's a congressman from California, I believe.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

Considering that very few politicians live and act according to religious values anyway, this one is rather baffled by the dislike towards atheist. At the very least  ^*

an atheist is honest about their beliefs instead of paying lip service and turning belief into a tool to win more voters. Imho, the latter is much more immoral and demonstrates much greater disregard for religion than anything the most acidic, hateful and mean-tongued atheist could come up with.

edited 10th Mar '11 10:16:36 AM by Beholderess

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

It should be noted that privacy is dead in today's society. Not just in the US, but everywhere. It's not really worth lamenting; — it's our new reality.

And it's not as if I can point to other countries with more credibility. "Hey! We should be more liek Italy! Berlusconi filled his entire cabinet with adult film stars, and you don't see anybody giving him shit about it!"

So, it's toss-up. Would you rather live in a sexually-repressed puritan nation, or a testosterone-soaked chauvinist nation.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

@johnnyfog But I'm already living in the US!

There's no justice in the world and there never was~

^ Then you're boned.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

@Beholderess It's less about values or right or wrong and more about proving that you're a member in good standing of The Tribe. One of us, so to speak. The dominant swatch of American Christianity, puts raw tribalism way before any thought of ethics or morals. Atheists are not only not a member of The Tribe, our self-identifying as such is basically flipping the bird to The Tribe, or at least that's the way it often looks.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

That sounds very interesting. Please elaborate.

Or like that gay racist islamophobic extreme-right-wing Dutch politician who was assasinated, and later they found out he had a BDSM dungeon where he tied and tortured Moroccan male teenaged prostitutes. And he has gone on the record as having very nasty racist opinions on Moroccans in general. Noboy but the Moroccan Dutch gave a shit: prostitution is legal, those kids weren't underage (they were fiteen to nineteen), and BDSM is accepted as a Casual Kink.

So... imagine what would happen to such a guy's cred in the US... Even the French were kinda shocked.

"Sweets are good. Sweets are justice."

Because, forcing people to worry about their private lives all day every day will drive them stark staring mad, which is a requirement for government.

@Karmakin

That is, unfortunately, true. Human mind is still stuck in herds and tribes. And that is what makes humans bastards

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common