Do political "disqualifiers" still exist?

Good question from a viewer, in the Trump era where even more than a dozen allegations of sexual assault don't hamper your ability to be elected President...are there still "disqualifiers?"

IMO, yes and no. Some of us who really liked Al Franken are throwing up in our mouths a bit now. Supporters of certain other politicians who might be photographed in your post don't seem to care. Maybe it just depends upon who your enemies are. Sheesh, the guy just endorsed a guy who got banned from the mall. Who gets banned from the mall?

I believe for too many people, they no longer do. Trump boasted publicly at a rally that he could shoot someone in broad daylight on 5th avenue and not lose a single vote.

Good Post 👍👍👍

Sir I am waiting for your content.Now I am really happy for sharing your most educative post...I have learned greatly from your content.Please give me permission i want to resteem this post.Your content always hit this is my opinion...

good post regards from beginner @mizi23 please guidance and support ...?

Questions: Didn't President Donald Trump answer every question that was asked of him? Didn't we have enough coverage of these "Disqualifying factors" during the pre-election? Funny that these allegations were floating around durning the most sensitive timeframe of his electability. Do you think the American people were just too stupid to understand who they were voting for?

Do you think the American people were just too stupid to understand who they were voting for?

I mean, it's not ruled out, like, at all.

The Billy Bush tape was pretty damning, yeah. People still believe that OJ was framed.

Given the alternatives, you took the high ground then.

There were reports about the Watergate break in before the 1972 Richard Nixon election too. The extent of bad actions by Richard Nixon was revealed later. Ultimately, he had to step down from office to avoid impeachment.

A similar thing is happening now with Donald Trump. We learn more as we go along and we take action only once we have enough information to provide modern understandings of fairness.

In 2016, I was one of those people who though Democrats were pushing too hard on the "Russia" claims, but providing little good evidence to support them. In the past few months, much evidence has come out. We should adjust our views in light of what we learn.

As for the original question, the answer will come on December 12, 2017, in the Alabama Senate race. If a majority of the voters of Alabama choose to support a pedophile, then probably nothing is a "disqualifier" at least in that state. I hope we draw a line, especially when Republicans generally have been filling the internet with charges of pedophilia for about two years, particularly in the Pizzagate commentaries. It would be the height of hypocrisy to now turn around and say they are good with their pedophile after all those crocodile tears for so long.

I would also hope that we realize that "character" matters -- insofar as someone who would molest people, use power to take advantage of people, or attempt sex acts with minors are probably not the types of people that can be trusted with things like Net Neutrality, avoid wars, providing "terrific" health care to the masses, or anything else.