• Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    Think about it this way, if you disqualified politicians who engaged in some kind of sexual assault there would not be many left to govern.

    It is accepted and now normalized. If you are rich you can rape and do whatever you want.

    The problem for me is I grew up in a country that I thought was beyond that. I was apparently wrong.

    • Fillicia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      2 months ago

      there would not be many left to govern

      Good. There is not that many positions to fill anyway.

      It’s not normal that a criminal record that would make it almost impossible to find an entry-level grocery packer job is completely OK for a politician.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        a criminal record that would make it almost impossible to find an entry-level grocery packer job is completely OK for a politician fucking president of a huge country

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you are rich you can rape and do whatever you want.

      This is why I hate capitalism so much. Extreme power disparity is the heart of tyranny and the extreme disparities in wealth that capitalism creates only leads to extreme disparities in political power.

      I fear that the US went past a breaking point and that the US will fully be an oligarchy after Trump is done

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I refuse to think about it that way lol. Quantity does not equal acceptance for me. We have to hold our countries’ representatives to a higher standard than being outright criminals, guilty of many, serious offenses. If there are only a handful of politicians left after such a sift, then so be it.

      Thank God I’m not in the USA. But it’s not like this doesn’t fuck over the rest of the world too.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      if you disqualified politicians who engaged in some kind of sexual assault there would not be many left to govern.

      I’ve heard arguments to the effect that politicians who are too clean simply don’t succeed, because people don’t want to give you big campaign checks unless they have Compromat on you.

      So you get invited to the Eyes Wide Shut party, your rich friends catalog your debauchery, and this is what keeps you loyal.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I guess it didn’t work on Tim Walz or Bernie Sanders?

        Seems pretty easy to avoid.

        And Bernie took his goddamn honeymoon in the USSR, I imagine they could have bugged every room he entered if they wanted to.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I guess it didn’t work on Tim Walz or Bernie Sanders?

          Both are about as loyal as any Dem foot soldiers you could name. Sanders, in particular, has been at least as zealous on Israel as Biden throughout his career.

          Bernie disagrees with the Neoliberal rhetoric and wants to save capitalism from itself. But he’s staunchly partisan.

          If anyone could use some Compromat its Manchin

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There would absolutely be men who would qualify, as well as a lot of women. Why do you think everyone is sexually assaulting everyone else? Let’s not allow violent criminals (which rape is both violent and a crime, it is torture via sexual acts) to be in office. At a minimum.

    • FierySpectre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem with disqualifying anyone based on any crimes is that it would enable the current ruling party to stick crimes on the opposition to eliminate the competition.

      Just in case to clarify, I’m not defending child rapists who most surely did commit the crime in question, just saying it’s a dangerous concept.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem with disqualifying anyone based on any crimes is that it would enable the current ruling party to stick crimes on the opposition to eliminate the competition.

        As an example, Trump didn’t get elected because he was convicted of 34 felonies.

        Oh wait, maybe the possibility of false crime accusations don’t fucking matter when real ones aren’t a hurdle to getting elected.

        • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Lol right? Let’s stop pretending sexual assault or even pedophilia allegations do ANY HARM when the FUCKING PRESIDENT IS ONE. Let’s stop silencing victims’ stories of abuse out of concern for their abuser since it doesn’t matter anyway, it doesn’t hurt the perpetrator clearly, and just helps the victim to let them share. It also helps other victims be informed. I’m so fucking done with that line of speech now.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        it would enable the current ruling party to stick crimes on the opposition to eliminate the competition.

        Don Siegelman was the last Dem governor of Alabama. Pursued on spurious charges in 2004, which were immediately thrown out by the judge of the case, then again in 2006 by a Bush appointed Judge who was more friendly with Republican prosecutors.

        I expect a lot more of this in 2025 once Trump takes office and starts settling scores.