When did moral character stop being vital to leadership in our democracy?

I’d argue more than a few of our former Presidents going back 150 years were of questionable moral character.

Today things are just magnified in all areas.

Civil discourse is more and more rare. Just look at how people act on social media, kids videoing brawls at schools instead of breaking it up.
Asshattery is almost celebrated.

 

Yep... the News hid these flaws of our leaders from the public. However, today... the media picks sides and not only lets these indiscretions out of the bag, into the ether, but they often embellish the truth with no compunction, nor any legal recourse for the victims.

 

Billy Bob.

That's when "the ppl" overtly declared "we don't care if our POTUS is a rapist. It's the economy stupid!"

'reap what you sow.

Cest la vie.

 

Every president (every person) has flaws and moral lapses. They are, after all, human. There has been no one who has held the office of the presidency whose moral lapses have risen to the level of Trump's. No one, it's not even close. Nixon, the most morally corrupt president in my lifetime is a choir boy in comparison. It still astounds me that he gets ANY significant support from Christians. Trump is a one man teaching tool for what we should not want our children to become. He's a murder and a strong criticism away from a clean sweep of the Ten Commandments, most of them on multiple, ongoing occasions.

 

Republicans officially embraced their “IDGAF about morals and character” stance after Obama won. They were seething mad at someone who looked like him and his family occupying their once sacred White House vessel. That contingent has been unapologetically unhinged and have warmly welcomed, racism, ignorance, degeneracy etc ever since then.

 

This is a philosophy that I cannot understand, 92. Fundamentally, you are arguing that you have no agency in your own decisions. The other side elected a morally questionable president, and therefore we must do it too. Apart from the hypocritical aspect (All the other side’s actions are simply ones that we are going to emulate in a few years), this view completely robs us of any personal responsibility. As a result, you probably can’t even blame the Democrats for Clinton, as that was probably just reaping what the Republicans sowed.

I just can’t agree with a philosophy that simultaneously believes that the other side is despicable and is necessarily a role model for future conduct. As an opposing creed, Marcus Aurelius once wrote, “The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury.”

 

Except that I did not proclaim a philosophy, I postulated an explanation of a phenomenon in direct response to the question posed by the OP.

Doesn't mean I think it's right or good.

It's just the way politics go. That's been my admonition against the dems for their lawfare all along.

That shit will not be forgotten, and that tab will not go unsettled.

But it's the price you pay, when you sell out for immediate win, as the dems have, to defeat Trump.

Conversely, the GOP sold out to impeach Clinton over an extramarital affair that yielded perjury (after whiffing on the real shit they were going after).

Trump's first impeachment even the score on that count--but the dems couldn't leave well enough alone--they had to chase his ass into the private sector, and prompted him to run ( and likey win) again.

But make no mistake.... whether by Trump or some pubs down the road...that bill will be paid back... with interest.

 

Lol! Project much?

The left had melted down over Bush-Gore for 8 years prior.

The angst v Barry was reciprocity--and POLICY--fueled--the latter, as he was an overt leftist, talking shit about wrecking establishment and rebuilding anew, according to his leftist socialist leanings.

Race has @#$%& all to do with anything.

Preemptively--the Kenya BC issue went directly to constitutional legitimacy of his presidency--not about his race.

 

Yeah…I like my much more truthful and obvious explanation better. One thing I’ve learned about righties since ‘08 (when they were losing their collective shit at someone like Barack being in office and planning their ensuing revenge and get back) is when they emphatically claim “Race has nothing to do with it,” that’s their way of saying race has plenty to do with it.

 

Lol! Okay....

Just do long as you can cling to your faux, manufactured Attics Finch wet dream fantasy...

 

Sounds good to me! Happy Monday!

 

That sounds pretty unfair.

But I can think of some recourse for victims of the media acting negligently.

For example, Fox News recently knowingly broadcast the outright lies of one political candidate. They ended up agreeing to a settlement of nearly $1 billion, as penalty for their egregious misconduct. Newsmax recently agreed to a similar, albeit probably smaller, settlement.

Perhaps you can think of more?

So that bad ole unfair media certainly is held to some account when they knowingly err.

 

The (perceived) integrity of a candidate is foremost to me in making my decision. If the candidate is not trustworthy and lacks integrity little else matters.

I hired a lot of UF kids for seasonal help and i told each of them that i hired them knowing they were completely ignorant about what they would be doing. They were going to make mistakes and tear up my trucks and equipment but i could fix all that and teach them how to do better and besides i had already made every mistake they could even imagine. But if they ever lied to me and i found out they would be fired then and there. I could repair equipment and drag trucks out of the swamp but i had no idea how to repair dishonesty.
I never could vote for Bill Clinton for this reason and its why i would never vote for trump.

 

Also add in the fact that he's saying something untrue.

 

Who cast a vote for Bill Clinton, despite their knowledge that he was a rapist?

What rape allegations against WJC were ignored by voters?

Are you just making things up because you put a not so cute French quote at the end of many of your posts?

 

1992. To answer the thread question. That was the year the Democrats asserted that they no longer cared about moral character in a President. In 2016, enough Republicans asserted that moral character was losing battle if the other side did not care, so they followed suit.

 

Obama built a coalition of voters that looked unstoppable forever more. The old GOP coalition of cultural and financial conservatives was just too small to compete with it.

The GOP had to embrace the deplorables they had ignored for so long and pull them into the political sphere to compete and Trump was the perfect vessel to attract them.

They sold their soul to do so, but winning is the be all end all.

 

Revisionist history.

There were nothing out there but unproven allegations until Monica's blue dress was rolled out in his 2nd term. There were so many wild and silly debunked attacks on Clinton some going back decades that it all sounded like the boy that cried wolf before that.

 

lol man.
Turn the msnbc off for a sec.