Why is this not surprising?
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 13:54 last edited by
In this climate it is the only smart thing to do politically.
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
-
In this climate it is the only smart thing to do politically.
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 13:57 last edited by@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 14:02 last edited by
I have a rule never to be alone with an American unless a psychiatrist is present.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:
Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.
BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 14:04 last edited by@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:
BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!
I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.
-
@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 14:36 last edited by@catseye3 completely agree. I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people, often just one person, and I can assure you that kind of distrust and those kinds of thoughts are not on anyone’s mind. And it’s not a trust he had to “earn” from me, the kind of person he is was apparent from the very beginning.
-
@catseye3 completely agree. I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people, often just one person, and I can assure you that kind of distrust and those kinds of thoughts are not on anyone’s mind. And it’s not a trust he had to “earn” from me, the kind of person he is was apparent from the very beginning.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 14:41 last edited by@jodi said in Why is this not surprising?:
I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people,
Agreed. However, as a public figure, I can see some rando idiot taking a photo of him having lunch with someone, and the next thing you know, The National Enquirer plasters the picture all over the front page: "Veep and his Girlfriend enjoy lunch at intimate setting!"
It's not that they don't trust each other, it's that they don't trust people outside their relationship.
-
@jodi said in Why is this not surprising?:
I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people,
Agreed. However, as a public figure, I can see some rando idiot taking a photo of him having lunch with someone, and the next thing you know, The National Enquirer plasters the picture all over the front page: "Veep and his Girlfriend enjoy lunch at intimate setting!"
It's not that they don't trust each other, it's that they don't trust people outside their relationship.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:03 last edited by
And I think you and Cats are both wrong.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:16 last edited by Doctor Phibes
What if he's secretly gay?
(It's a joke, dumbass, however it leads to the conclusion that no person should be with any other person they're not married to without a third party being present)
-
@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:27 last edited by Jolly@catseye3 said in Why is this not surprising?:
@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.
@catseye3 said in Why is this not surprising?:
@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.
If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.
Got any bona fides to back that statement up?
-
@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:
BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!
I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:29 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Why is this not surprising?:
@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:
BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!
I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.
Projecting much?
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:31 last edited by
It's worth noting that Mike Pence could never get away with this if he had a proper job.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:51 last edited by
Well, he doesn't, hasn't, and is unlikely to have a job where he cannot make this happen so it's irrelevant.
Rather than slagging the guy in a field where infidelity is legion, maybe we ought to recognize him for the integrity he has clearly shown throughout his career and the past four years.
-
Well, he doesn't, hasn't, and is unlikely to have a job where he cannot make this happen so it's irrelevant.
Rather than slagging the guy in a field where infidelity is legion, maybe we ought to recognize him for the integrity he has clearly shown throughout his career and the past four years.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:55 last edited by jodi@mik Do you think infidelity is more common in the political realm than in any other? (Not trying to argue, I just sort of assume that infidelity probably occurs at the same rate all over, we just hear about the public figures more)
-
@mik Do you think infidelity is more common in the political realm than in any other? (Not trying to argue, I just sort of assume that infidelity probably occurs at the same rate all over, we just hear about the public figures more)
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:56 last edited by George K@jodi said in Why is this not surprising?:
@mik Do you think infidelity is more common in the political realm than in any other?
Interesting question. Perhaps it could be expanded to “Do you think that infidelity is more common by those in power?”
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:57 last edited by
I think opportunities for male infidelity vary with status and power so it’s pretty rampant in politics but at the top of other professions too.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 15:59 last edited by jodi
Sorry, I was editing as you all commented. Surely people are drawn to people with perceived power, and people with power sometimes take advantage. But people also cheat. I don’t know that it’s more likely to happen when there is power involved. It’s sometimes just hormones.
-
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 17:35 last edited by
Good for McConnell and McCarthy prioritizing Biden event over Trump send off. Playing ball at least initially.
-
Well, he doesn't, hasn't, and is unlikely to have a job where he cannot make this happen so it's irrelevant.
Rather than slagging the guy in a field where infidelity is legion, maybe we ought to recognize him for the integrity he has clearly shown throughout his career and the past four years.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 17:40 last edited by@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:
Well, he doesn't, hasn't, and is unlikely to have a job where he cannot make this happen so it's irrelevant.
Rather than slagging the guy in a field where infidelity is legion, maybe we ought to recognize him for the integrity he has clearly shown throughout his career and the past four years.
This discussion actually started with me praising him.
It's that inveterate troll George K you have to thank for the rest of it!
-
@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:
BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!
I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.
wrote on 19 Jan 2021, 17:45 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Why is this not surprising?:
I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.
There's no flies on Mike Pence.