Should we expect polititians to delve into sexual dalliances. There are many examples but is it a result of a driven conquering personality that is necessary for politics. Perhaps ego. But it seems ingrained ,should it be part of our voting calculus.
I think that your premise is that politicians delve more than non-politicians. I think this assumption needs to be demonstrated before any real debate can begin.
Point was not to compare non pol and pol, but to say it is common enough to be a non factor.I am at this moment trying to obtain on the net the Senate divorce rate. Having trouble.
Common knowledge presidential level
Jefferson
Cleveland
FDR
Harding
Kennedy
Eisenhower
maybe Clinton
maybe? I don’t think that there’s much maybe about it.
I just want to add that I agree that personal sexual matters should not be part of our voting calculus. Unfortunately, there are lots of things that shouldn’t be, but are. There’s a reason that every American president has been married, straight (AFAWK), white and male.
If a politician’s sex life does not impede his/her ability to do the job, I don’t care if they get off on dressing up in furry costumes and getting whipped by a leather-clad dominatrix. As long as I don’t have to see it, anyway…
I say we should hold pols to the same standards of sexual morality as anybody else – but those standards are controversial and in flux for most of the past century.
50 percent and more divorce rate. What standards do we hold ourselves to. Do we actually expect more from them than we do ourselves. Who were the gay presidents?
I ascribe to the sentiment expressed in a remark attributed to Ross Perot: “If his wife can’t trust him, why should I?” My personal view is that married people who are unfaithful to their spouses have broken the most solemn promise most of us make. This influences how I vote; it’s not the sole factor, but it matters to me.
Nitpick, James Buchanan, the 15th president was a bachelor.
If I understand the OP correctly (a tenuous proposition at best), he’s asking if we should expect politicians to have sexual dalliances. I don’t think we should EXPECT them too by any means…no more than we EXPECT anyone else to be unfaithful to their S.O.'s. We should probably acknowledge that, being human (well, some of them 
) that such things WILL happen.
As to whether or not it makes a difference to the individual voter…well, thats another kettle of fish. While I think its safe to say that it makes no difference to SOME voters, it is also a fact that it DOES to others. I don’t think a one size fits all about ‘sexual dalliances’ is either realistic OR desirable with the voting public. Its like any other issue or idiosyncrasy of the politician in question (like some folks dislike Bush’s leering smile, say, while others don’t mind and dislike him for other reasons 
)…its all based on the individual and what they are looking for in a leader. For some its no big deal, for others its a matter of trust or perhaps expectation that our representatives SHOULD meet higher standards than the general mob, and for still others its a religious issue.
-XT
http://www.trivia-library.com/b/was-american-founding-father-alexander-hamilton-gay-part-1.h
Hamilton gay?
In the case of someone like Bill Clinton, it seems pretty clear that Hillary knew of his sexual activities and either doesn’t care or hides it well.
How do we know that just because a pol has sex outside their marriage that there has been a breach of trust with the spouse?
If I understand what this cryptic comment means, you are saying that these presidents are commonly understood to have had affairs during their presidency…yes? While I think a few of these are assumptions (and Jefferson wasn’t even married while president), its pretty amusing you would put (maybe) by Clinton…one of the few we are SURE had an affair while president (and married…though to Hillary, so perhaps you don’t count that).
-XT
I don’t know enough about Buchanan to comment but I disagree with the conclusions reached in the Wiki article. The evidence it presents is extremely weak and can easily be explained when put into historical context. I won’t bore you with a lengthy refutation for each of its arguments. I’ll just say I believe it’s highly unlikely that Lincoln was gay.*
*Actively gay. Who knows if he was attracted to men? He could have been. But I think it’s highly unlikely he acted upon it.
Well, when one group of politicians gets all riled up about the sexual acitivities of another, the hypocrisy meter almost invariably goes up to ridiculously amusing levels. So I’m all for it. Cause it’s funny, and probably the best method available to make people properly cynical and disrespectful of our political leadership.
I chalk up to the unresolved, still-occasionally-debated question of whether blowjobs count.
Cecil on Was Abraham Lincoln gay?
As to the thread’s main topic, I sympathize both with rjung’s and with Crotalus’s points of view. On the one hand, I think, why should I care about a politician’s sex life, or anything else he does in private, if it isn’t directly relevant to how good a job he does? And it’s not at all clear to me, looking at history, that great leaders overall had either a higher sex drive or lower ability to keep their pants zipped than not-so-great leaders.
On the other hand, how well a person behaves himself sexually or keeps his marital vows can obviously relate to that person’s character, self-control, trustworthiness, and good judgment, which are important qualities for a leader to have.
By the way, gonzomax, here are some question marks in case you’ve run out: ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Are you married or seeing someone steadily? I suggest then simply asking your wife/SO that question and see what THEY say about it.
I think most reasonable people feel that ‘blowjobs count’ wrt infidelity. Besides, I’m frankly skeptical that Clinton NEVER did anything else while president (and I have about as much proof as you do that Lincoln was gay…probably more circumstantial evidence in fact ).
-XT