Is it really honesty you want?

[Hermit For Peace]

Obama has presented us without scandal, and I'd say he is a pretty honest person. His entire family seems like real down to earth folk.

But is that what we really want for a President? Obama didn't get a lot of things done because of his bad marriage with Congress.

I want someone for President who gets things done. At this point I'm not too worried about the honesty and integrity issue regarding Hillary and Trump.

Neither of them has ever been put in jail for anything (hey, that counts for something), and both have seemed to walk the line of what is acceptable and what is borderline, so I'd call it a tie on that front.

So forget the baggage...who has the staying power, the experience, the calm personality, the temperament, the intelligence, the policy knowledge, the international backing, the DRIVE to be a good President?

That's what we should be focusing on at this late date.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I'm not really game to go down this route because I'm not willing to concede that Hillary Clinton has actually been deliberately dishonest.

[Hermit For Peace]

I'm not really game to go down this route because I'm not willing to concede that Hillary Clinton has actually been deliberately dishonest.

The perception is there, whether or not Hillary has been deliberately honest. And no matter how many times she is cleared of wrong doing, too many people turn a deaf ear to it all.

If the GOP had a "normal" candidate running for President, I don't know if Hillary would stand a chance.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I want honesty. I want politicians to be clear about what they support and what they don't. You have to have a filter, but that doesn't mean you constantly dodge questions and lie to the American People.

[Mallow]

I want honesty. I want politicians to be clear about what they support and what they don't. You have to have a filter, but that doesn't mean you constantly dodge questions and lie to the American People.

Agreed. That's why I support Clinton, and that's why I don't support Trump.

[NeverAgain]

I want honesty. I want politicians to be clear about what they support and what they don't. You have to have a filter, but that doesn't mean you constantly dodge questions and lie to the American People.

Agreed. That's why I support Clinton, and that's why I don't support Trump.

[Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez]

I want honesty. I want politicians to be clear about what they support and what they don't. You have to have a filter, but that doesn't mean you constantly dodge questions and lie to the American People.

Agreed. That's why I support  Ted Cruz, and that's why I don't support Trump Hillary Clinton.

All better!

[Blue3]

Honestly, I care about results more, especially when it comes from ascetic ethics like this email stuff. Up to a point, obviously.

I'm probably in the minority, but I think some of our ethics laws and policies are too strict, and too much transparency in some cases too.

If someone decides to support universal healthcare in exchange for getting a new bridge in their homestate, I'd so take the deal. But even those kinds of deals are less likely to happen, at least at local/state level, due to some ultra-transparency.

I want someone who knows the system and how to get things done in it to get things. Then, if somehow the entire progressive agenda is implemented, we can talk about more ethics reforms and transparency. But making a positive difference in people's lives should come first.

[Bismarck]

Honestly, I care about results more, especially when it comes from ascetic ethics like this email stuff. Up to a point, obviously.

I'm probably in the minority, but I think some of our ethics laws and policies are too strict, and too much transparency in some cases too.

If someone decides to support universal healthcare in exchange for getting a new bridge in their homestate, I'd so take the deal. But even those kinds of deals are less likely to happen, at least at local/state level, due to some ultra-transparency.

I want someone who knows the system and how to get things done in it to get things. Then, if somehow the entire progressive agenda is implemented, we can talk about more ethics reforms and transparency. But making a positive difference in people's lives should come first.

I understand the sentiment but consider that this would go both ways. It may sound nice to get your policies with a little bit of chicanery but what if universal healthcare was prevented because some blue dog dem got a new highway in her district? If you think it's okay in one situation you would have to be ready to accept it in all situations.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

There's something to be said for strong, perhaps excessive cultural intolerance of corruption in and of itself, considering the deleterious effects of that corruption on economic performance and social cohesion in many countries across the world. The reason why we want honest politicians is because we don't want leaders like Putin who feel free to loot their country while publicly proclaiming how much they've Made Russia Great Again.

[Hermit For Peace]

But does anyone feel they would be getting an honest politician in this current race?

There is so much perception that Hillary is "corrupt" thanks to Trump in large part calling her "Crooked Hillary" all the time.

And there is also a treasure trove of questionable stuff that Trump has done, in this election cycle and through the years.

So, doesn't seem as though honesty is going to catch a lot of votes this time.

That's my perception.

[Blue3]

Honestly, I care about results more, especially when it comes from ascetic ethics like this email stuff. Up to a point, obviously.

I'm probably in the minority, but I think some of our ethics laws and policies are too strict, and too much transparency in some cases too.

If someone decides to support universal healthcare in exchange for getting a new bridge in their homestate, I'd so take the deal. But even those kinds of deals are less likely to happen, at least at local/state level, due to some ultra-transparency.

I want someone who knows the system and how to get things done in it to get things. Then, if somehow the entire progressive agenda is implemented, we can talk about more ethics reforms and transparency. But making a positive difference in people's lives should come first.

I understand the sentiment but consider that this would go both ways. It may sound nice to get your policies with a little bit of chicanery but what if universal healthcare was prevented because some blue dog dem got a new highway in her district? If you think it's okay in one situation you would have to be ready to accept it in all situations.

Yeah I understand. I just take the practical approach: whichever way is more likely to get the stuff I want done, done. That's bluntly honest, but I have a feeling a decent number of people feel the same way, on both sides of the aisle.

[Xing]

I do want politicians to be honest, and held accountable when they manipulate facts to score political points and mislead the public. Obviously, honesty alone won't solve every problem. But the fact that we have a nominee like Donald Trump, who has no regard for the truth, is disgraceful.

[Ogre Mage]

Bill Clinton's honest and trustworthy polling numbers in 1992 were poor and Bush I called him "Slick Willie" which is a lot like "Crooked Hillary."  He still won.

At any rate, Polifact has rated Clinton a far, far more truthful candidate than Donald Trump:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/

[Speed of Sound]

Bill Clinton's honest and trustworthy polling numbers in 1992 were poor and Bush I called him "Slick Willie" which is a lot like "Crooked Hillary."  He still won.

Time's a flat circle.

[Lyin' Steve]

I think golf is dishonest.  What kind of game is it where the less effort you put in the better your score?

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Nope, George Carlin was right about the Clintons. You don't want honesty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0twWuMAUqrQ

[BlueSwan]

Honesty in politics is somewhat overrated. Sure, we all like people to be honest to us and it might even work in a campaign. But in power politics pure honesty will likely get you nowhere. Achieving actual political results for the country is all about being able to play the political game. A certain degree of honesty is needed for this. For instance, your political allies and opponents need to be able to trust your word for a good working relationship to exist. But on the other hand, in a negotiation you can't be to obvious as to your wants and you have to be able to compromise, even if compromising means to a certain extent backing out of statements you have previously made. Simililarly, if you have to make a deal with Ted Cruz you have to be cordial with him even if you, like every other politican, despise him. Power politics is largely an act and pure honesty and acting doesn't really mesh that well. Like Reagan said, there's no limit to what you can do if you let others take the credit. Effective politics will almost always require some level of manipulation.

[Hermit For Peace]

Bill Clinton's honest and trustworthy polling numbers in 1992 were poor and Bush I called him "Slick Willie" which is a lot like "Crooked Hillary."  He still won.

At any rate, Polifact has rated Clinton a far, far more truthful candidate than Donald Trump:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/

I was aware of that truth-o-meter, but it seems that it doesn't really matter to people, not even to Trump. He has the gall to call Hillary "crooked" anyway, even though most of her statements are true or mostly true, and most of his own statements are false.

The public perception is that Hillary is less trustworthy than even Trump. Once you are labeled it's hard to change what people think of you, no matter if the information is true or not.

So in my view, getting stuck on the "honesty" issue in this campaign is not as important as focusing on the abilities the candidates bring to the job. And in that regard, Trump is woefully lacking, big time.

[Hermit For Peace]

Honesty in politics is somewhat overrated. Sure, we all like people to be honest to us and it might even work in a campaign. But in power politics pure honesty will likely get you nowhere. Achieving actual political results for the country is all about being able to play the political game. A certain degree of honesty is needed for this. For instance, your political allies and opponents need to be able to trust your word for a good working relationship to exist. But on the other hand, in a negotiation you can't be to obvious as to your wants and you have to be able to compromise, even if compromising means to a certain extent backing out of statements you have previously made. Simililarly, if you have to make a deal with Ted Cruz you have to be cordial with him even if you, like every other politican, despise him. Power politics is largely an act and pure honesty and acting doesn't really mesh that well. Like Reagan said, there's no limit to what you can do if you let others take the credit. Effective politics will almost always require some level of manipulation.

I think your post offers great insight. People delude themselves into thinking that "honesty" is highly desirable in the political arena, but it's not always the best road to take. That's reality.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I'll settle for a president who isn't an idiot evil reality tv character.