The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

["Got Disney"]

No, we are not electing them. We are electing the candidate. All this emphasis on what the spouse thinks or the children think is just more of the BS fodder that's taken over politics. Frankly, I don't give a crap what any of them think. It's irrelevant to who signs the bills and who pushes the nuclear button.

When I see a spouse's name on the ballot is when I'll actually give a damn what they think.

Well electing them is the wrong word used because you are right we are not electing them. But they for sure are there spouses sounding board and as strong as Michelle is and Bill is they will have a say in what there husbands think. Maybe they wont be voting on the bills but when they go home at night and are eating dinner or talking in bed they will bounce there feeling off there wives/husbands and ask there opinions.

And you can see how Michelle and Bill are they are both verbal and speak there minds. They will not sit back like Mrs. Bush and not speak there minds. At least neither of them come across to me as the silent type....

 

[MassJester]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23350400]
And you can see how Michelle and Bill are they are both verbal and speak there minds. They will not sit back like Mrs. Bush and not speak there minds.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure that Laura Bush's lack of public position on issues is indicative of having neither opinion nor influence. It's very possible that she simply chooses to share her thoughts with the President privately and not be a public figure.

 

[wvrevy]

I'm not sure that Laura Bush's lack of public position on issues is indicative of having neither opinion nor influence. It's very possible that she simply chooses to share her thoughts with the President privately and not be a public figure.

So what...she walks in the White House master bedroom every night (at 9:00 or whatever time his beddy-bye time is ) and says, "Well Georgie, what did you screw up today?"



Actually, I kinda like that image.

Seriously, though...I don't know that there's a lot of "there" there, ya' know? I mean...we aren't talking about a Harvard educated lawyer...she was a librarian. Not that there's anything wrong with being a librarian, but it's not exactly the level of achievement we've grown used to seeing from women on the Democratic side of the aisle.

 

["Got Disney"]

So what...she walks in the White House master bedroom every night (at 9:00 or whatever time his beddy-bye time is ) and says, "Well Georgie, what did you screw up today?"



Actually, I kinda like that image.

I can see her now.....there there Bushy baby it will all be okay...I will kiss your mistakes and make everything all better....now go to sleep dear it will all be better in the morning....

Than as she goes to sleep she is thinking to herself....gee what a putz

 

["Got Disney"]

I'm not sure that Laura Bush's lack of public position on issues is indicative of having neither opinion nor influence. It's very possible that she simply chooses to share her thoughts with the President privately and not be a public figure.

Thats what I mean....they will after the elections or even after one or the other gets the nod ..back off.

But in there private time they will share there opinions and because they are smart people( Michelle and Bill) Barack or Hillary will take in consideration there opinions....in private.

 

[LuvDuke]

See, I really do want to hear what the spouses think about things, though I don't hold them to the same standards that I would hold a candidate. Like I said before, I think the type of person the candidate is married to says a lot about them. If they are married to a vibrant, intelligent person (The Obamas and Clintons), then they're likely to want people like that around them to challenge their thinking on the issues. If they're married to a mouse, however, it might indicate that the only people they'll have around them are those that agree with them. Again...Bush is a perfect example of that.

I still wanna see a spousal debate between Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama. I really like both of them, and man that'd be fun to watch. I bet Bill would win - he should, anyway - but I bet Michelle would win a few points and make him sweat it out.

The day the spouses of the candidates hold a debate is the day, IMO, we've lost our minds. I don't care what the spouse's opinion is. And the choice of who one marries is a private matter and should stay that way. Or should politicians now choose their spouses on "gee, what is the public looking for".

And what if they're married to a quiet, retiring individual? Does that make them unsuitable for public office because their spouse isn't a public sounding board?

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23350400]Well electing them is the wrong word used because you are right we are not electing them. But they for sure are there spouses sounding board and as strong as Michelle is and Bill is they will have a say in what there husbands think. Maybe they wont be voting on the bills but when they go home at night and are eating dinner or talking in bed they will bounce there feeling off there wives/husbands and ask there opinions.

And you can see how Michelle and Bill are they are both verbal and speak there minds. They will not sit back like Mrs. Bush and not speak there minds. At least neither of them come across to me as the silent type....[/QUOTE]

We have no idea what happens between the Bush's and nor I care to know. That is a private matter.

I think when we start considering the choice of spouse as some kind of hurdle for a public official is the day I think we've gone waaayyy too far.

Let's keep some things private because all of this openness isn't getting us a better candidate or a better office holder.

 

[LuvDuke]

So what...she walks in the White House master bedroom every night (at 9:00 or whatever time his beddy-bye time is ) and says, "Well Georgie, what did you screw up today?"



Actually, I kinda like that image.

Seriously, though...I don't know that there's a lot of "there" there, ya' know? I mean...we aren't talking about a Harvard educated lawyer...she was a librarian. Not that there's anything wrong with being a librarian, but it's not exactly the level of achievement we've grown used to seeing from women on the Democratic side of the aisle.

What difference to the governance of the country does the relationship between spouse's make?

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23350831]Thats what I mean....they will after the elections or even after one or the other gets the nod ..back off.

But in there private time they will share there opinions and because they are smart people( Michelle and Bill) Barack or Hillary will take in consideration there opinions....in private.[/QUOTE]

I have no idea what they share or if they share anything and neither does anyone else. One's marriage and what goes on within that marriage is a private matter. I hope it stays that way. That's all we need is millions of people judging someone's private life.

Come to think of it, isn't that the complaint against the righties?

 

[wvrevy]

The day the spouses of the candidates hold a debate is the day, IMO, we've lost our minds. I don't care what the spouse's opinion is. And the choice of who one marries is a private matter and should stay that way. Or should politicians now choose their spouses on "gee, what is the public looking for".

And what if they're married to a quiet, retiring individual? Does that make them unsuitable for public office because their spouse isn't a public sounding board?

Ok, so hold the debate after the nomination. I don't mean that it should be used as a part of the democratic nomination process. I just sincerely like both Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama, and would love to hear the give-and-take that would occur in a debate between the two of them. Honestly, I meant nothing more than that.

As for politicians choosing their wives...I don't think it's that simple. A person's spouse does say something about that person. That's the person they have chosen to spend their lives with, so yes, I do think it is some reflection on them. Again, as Got Disney and others have said, the spouse will have influence over one of the most powerful people on the planet, so yes, I do think it's important to - at least in a general way, as I don't expect them to be as well versed or spoken as their candidate-spouse - have some sense of what that person believes in.

Nothing wrong with being married to someone that prefers to stay out of the limelight. I know my DW probably wouldn't want to be in that position, so I certainly don't think it's a bad thing. But like it or not, the First Lady (or Gentleman ) DOES have influence on the president, and I think that makes it something in the public's interest.

JMHO...

 

["Got Disney"]

The day the spouses of the candidates hold a debate is the day, IMO, we've lost our minds. I don't care what the spouse's opinion is. And the choice of who one marries is a private matter and should stay that way. Or should politicians now choose their spouses on "gee, what is the public looking for".

And what if they're married to a quiet, retiring individual? Does that make them unsuitable for public office because their spouse isn't a public sounding board?



We have no idea what happens between the Bush's and nor I care to know. That is a private matter.

I think when we start considering the choice of spouse as some kind of hurdle for a public official is the day I think we've gone waaayyy too far.

Let's keep some things private because all of this openness isn't getting us a better candidate or a better office holder.

What if the spouse of a candidate has a record or has a history of bad drug abuse or is an Alcoholic or a past of adultery( like Bill) or even just plain RUDE....

I think knowing that the candidate has a strong wife that can act as first Lady is important. Of course as for not electing the candidate based on there spouses would be wrong but by getting a little taste of who there spouses are is important.

Think about it...if you hated your husbands/ wives best friends spouce and you did not trust her as far as you could throw her/him....would you let that persons spouse take over your house hold bills why you were gone knowing darn well that that person you hate would be an influence on it...

Well think about that and being POTUS spouse...if they are a creep you would not want them to have influence over them....

does that make sense

 

[MerryPoppins]

LuvDuke, I see what you are saying in most cases. But the spouse of the POTUS will not only have influence, but will also be our First Lady (or whatever you'd choose to call him if it is a man). Like it or not the candidate's spouse is going to be out there representing our country. So I think we do have to take that into consideration at least a little bit.

Also I agree that a person's choice of a spouse says something about them. Maybe some would say that's none of my business, but I use every bit of information I can when I'm casting my vote for president. If the candidate has married someone who is a total ditz, I would wonder what type of people he/she would choose to be in the cabinet.

That does not mean I think we need to pick the spouses apart or be cruel to them. But I do think they deserve a good look. It does tell you some things about the candidate.

 

[MerryPoppins]

Wow wvrevy! Mark today on the calendar. We just agreed. See, we can get along if we just don't say anything that can be perceived as an attack.

 

[LuvDuke]

Ok, so hold the debate after the nomination. I don't mean that it should be used as a part of the democratic nomination process. I just sincerely like both Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama, and would love to hear the give-and-take that would occur in a debate between the two of them. Honestly, I meant nothing more than that.

As for politicians choosing their wives...I don't think it's that simple. A person's spouse does say something about that person. That's the person they have chosen to spend their lives with, so yes, I do think it is some reflection on them. Again, as Got Disney and others have said, the spouse will have influence over one of the most powerful people on the planet, so yes, I do think it's important to - at least in a general way, as I don't expect them to be as well versed or spoken as their candidate-spouse - have some sense of what that person believes in.

Nothing wrong with being married to someone that prefers to stay out of the limelight. I know my DW probably wouldn't want to be in that position, so I certainly don't think it's a bad thing. But like it or not, the First Lady (or Gentleman ) DOES have influence on the president, and I think that makes it something in the public's interest.

JMHO...

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23351235]What if the spouse of a candidate has a record or has a history of bad drug abuse or is an Alcoholic or a past of adultery( like Bill) or even just plain RUDE....

I think knowing that the candidate has a strong wife that can act as first Lady is important. Of course as for not electing the candidate based on there spouses would be wrong but by getting a little taste of who there spouses are is important.

Think about it...if you hated your husbands/ wives best friends spouce and you did not trust her as far as you could throw her/him....would you let that persons spouse take over your house hold bills why you were gone knowing darn well that that person you hate would be an influence on it...

Well think about that and being POTUS spouse...if they are a creep you would not want them to have influence over them....

does that make sense[/QUOTE]

You can phrase it any way you like, but the fact is I believe who one marries is a private matter. What happens between spouses is a private matter.

When I elect a politician, I elect them for a specific job and not to mind my household. I can do that just fine myself.

Quite honestly, I think this entire discussion is based on speculation as to what you think is happening and not what you know for sure is happening. I'm not particularly interested in the private conversations between spouses and I have no earthly idea why people seem to think that affects public policy.

Btw, I don't have to like someone to be willing to vote them. I'm not voting for my new best friend, but who I feel can do the best job for the country. Is it easier to vote for someone "likeable"? Sure it it, but it makes absolutely no difference to the governing of the country.

 

[MerryPoppins]

I'm not voting for my new best friend, but who I feel can do the best job for the country. Is it easier to vote for someone "likeable"? Sure it it, but it makes absolutely no difference to the governing of the country.

I'm not trying to argue with you. It's fine that that is how you believe. But can you see that by electing the POTUS you are also sort of electing the spouse to be First Lady? They come as a package deal. So the way I see it, I also have to take into account how I think he/she will do representing our country in that capacity. Not nearly as important, mind you, but still something to consider.

 

[LuvDuke]

LuvDuke, I see what you are saying in most cases. But the spouse of the POTUS will not only have influence, but will also be our First Lady (or whatever you'd choose to call him if it is a man). Like it or not the candidate's spouse is going to be out there representing our country. So I think we do have to take that into consideration at least a little bit.

You'd like to think they have influence. The truth is, you have no idea if they do or not.

Also I agree that a person's choice of a spouse says something about them. Maybe some would say that's none of my business, but I use every bit of information I can when I'm casting my vote for president. If the candidate has married someone who is a total ditz, I would wonder what type of people he/she would choose to be in the cabinet.

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense. You're going to pick a Secretary of Defense based on your high school sweetheart that you happened to marry?

That does not mean I think we need to pick the spouses apart or be cruel to them. But I do think they deserve a good look. It does tell you some things about the candidate.

No, it tells you what you think you're seeing. It tells you what you would like it to tell you. None of us truly knows what goes on behind closed doors. IMO, that's the way it should be.

 

[LuvDuke]

I'm not trying to argue with you. It's fine that that is how you believe. But can you see that by electing the POTUS you are also sort of electing the spouse to be First Lady? They come as a package deal. So the way I see it, I also have to take into account how I think he/she will do representing our country in that capacity. Not nearly as important, mind you, but still something to consider.

Argue away. I've no problem with it.

As far as representing the country, that's why we have handlers and schedulers.

The only thing I consider in a candidate is their view and their plans for the country. Everything else is fluff that may or may not make a difference.

I don't judge the Clintons as to why she stayed with them. It tells me nothing about her. All it tells me is, for whatever private reasons, they stayed together.

I think we're taking "touchy-feely" to a whole new level when we consider the spouse as anything more than someone's spouse. I think we're projecting what we think a marriage should be. People get married and stay married for lots of different reasons. Most of the time, we don't know what those reasons are and I hope it stays that way.

 

[MerryPoppins]

To be honest, I have no desire to know what goes on behind closed doors.

Yes, you are correct. I have known relationships where there was a total lack of communication between spouses. But I'd say the vast majority of the time the person someone chooses to spend his/her life with is someone that they communicate with on a daily basis. No, I don't know that there is influence there, but because there would be in my relationship I will continue to assume there could be.

And no, just because you marry someone who is bright and articulate doesn't necessarily mean you will surround yourself with other bright and ariticulate people. But I would say in most cases it's a pretty good indicator. People who like to spend their time with thinkers and doers don't often (in my experience) choose a limp noodle for a spouse. It's been my experience that if you have a strong, opinionated, intelligent spouse, you probably like to be around strong, opinionated, intelligent people or you wouldn't have married that person to begin with. So I will continue to think that it's a strong indicator of the people you might choose to work with.

Just an opinion. You don't have to buy it.

 

["Got Disney"]

Argue away. I've no problem with it.

As far as representing the country, that's why we have handlers and schedulers.

The only thing I consider in a candidate is their view and their plans for the country. Everything else is fluff that may or may not make a difference.

I don't judge the Clintons as to why she stayed with them. It tells me nothing about her. All it tells me is, for whatever private reasons, they stayed together.

I think we're taking "touchy-feely" to a whole new level when we consider the spouse as anything more than someone's spouse. I think we're projecting what we think a marriage should be. People get married and stay married for lots of different reasons. Most of the time, we don't know what those reasons are and I hope it stays that way.

Well maybe I just interpret it differently because my life is an open book and have been with my DH for 28 years and we ask each others opinions on things all the time. I am a SAHM and he works out of the house so we are together all the time.

We share and discuss all issues ...not that we agree with each other all the time but we do converse about them. I have friends that have very private house holds and keep what goes on in there homes very private, and others that are like me and just say...ask me a question and i will tell you.

We do keep certain things of course private between us but not with each other. I tell him and he tells me everything...or should I just say we have no secrets.

If he were the POTUS or I was.....we would be sharing and discussing just as we do now.

But I do respect your opinion .

 

[wvrevy]

You'd like to think they have influence. The truth is, you have no idea if they do or not.

I'm sorry, but are you married? I can't believe that anyone could be and still make the statement above. Your spouse does influence you. Oh, I don't mean they withhold sex to get you to support a certain issue or anything. But how they think does have an affect on how you view things. It doesn't matter how strong-minded a person is, it just happens.

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23352375]Well maybe I just interpret it differently because my life is an open book and have been with my DH for 28 years and we ask each others opinions on things all the time. I am a SAHM and he works out of the house so we are together all the time.

We share and discuss all issues ...not that we agree with each other all the time but we do converse about them. I have friends that have very private house holds and keep what goes on in there homes very private, and others that are like me and just say...ask me a question and i will tell you.

We do keep certain things of course private between us but not with each other. I tell him and he tells me everything...or should I just say we have no secrets.

If he were the POTUS or I was.....we would be sharing and discussing just as we do now.

But I do respect your opinion .[/QUOTE]

Ditto, to all of the above (except change the 28 years to 11 and the SAHM to two working parents...and she makes more than me ).

 

[MerryPoppins]

I don't judge the Clintons as to why she stayed with them. It tells me nothing about her.

Wait a second.... I'm not saying we should judge anybody. All I'm saying is that I look at the spouse of the candidate critically to see if they seem bright, somewhat articulate (I'm less picky about that because I'm a total klutz when it comes to public speaking but it is something the First Lady will have to do), and somewhat passionate about her husband and his desire to be POTUS.

I'm not into pick, pick, picking at them. I just think they CAN be an indicator of what kind of person the candidate is attracted to. It's also the person that is going to represent us as First Lady.

Take it to the extreme. If a man running for POTUS is married to a woman who wants to run with a wild crowd and would hock the White House china to get high with her best buds in the Rose Garden. Would you have a problem with that? Don't you think it would show something about his judgement?

I just think your spouse can show your good judgement or lack of it. It can also be an indicator of the type of people you surround yourself with. That's all.

 

[LuvDuke]

I'm sorry, but are you married? I can't believe that anyone could be and still make the statement above. Your spouse does influence you. Oh, I don't mean they withhold sex to get you to support a certain issue or anything. But how they think does have an affect on how you view things. It doesn't matter how strong-minded a person is, it just happens.

Actually, I've been married 20 years. I am not President of the United States. Of course, my spouse has influence on me in regards to our personal life. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about public policy. We're talking about submitting budgets to Congress. We're about negotiating treaties. That's vastly different from our "hi honey, how was your day".

And I'll stand by my statement: In regards to public policy, you have no idea if the spouse is an active participant or a passive observer and neither do I.

Wait a second.... I'm not saying we should judge anybody. All I'm saying is that I look at the spouse of the candidate critically to see if they seem bright, somewhat articulate (I'm less picky about that because I'm a total klutz when it comes to public speaking but it is something the First Lady will have to do), and somewhat passionate about her husband and his desire to be POTUS.

I'm not into pick, pick, picking at them. I just think they CAN be an indicator of what kind of person the candidate is attracted to. It's also the person that is going to represent us as First Lady.

Take it to the extreme. If a man running for POTUS is married to a woman who wants to run with a wild crowd and would hock the White House china to get high with her best buds in the Rose Garden. Would you have a problem with that? Don't you think it would show something about his judgement?

I just think your spouse can show your good judgement or lack of it. It can also be an indicator of the type of people you surround yourself with. That's all.

You're looking to see if they're suitable. You're looking to see if they represent you. You're judging the spouse.

And the example of "a woman who wants to run with a wild crowd and would hock the White House china to get high with her best buds in the Rose Garden" is a security risk. As such, he/she will be treated as a security risk. Frankly, this extreme case scenario is on par with the rights "30 seconds to doomday, bring in the waterboarding". This isn't about the fringes and rational discussions/decisions shouldn't be based on extreme scenarios.

We're all just going to have to agree to disagree as to the role of the spouse in politics. I think we're going over the top with it and others feel differently.