Clinton's affair was with male intern

polyharmonic

Let's say instead of female intern Monica Lewinsky, it was revealed that the intern was male. How much larger would the repercussions be?

(Note that this doesn't necessarily mean Clinton is gay per se. He could be bisexual or just enjoy the power trip. Anyway...)

Would he be more likely to be convicted in the Senate? Would the scandal be so much more damaging because it involved homosexuality that he would be forced to resign? And would Hillary divorcing Bill be much higher of a probability? And would this destroy Clinton's legacy completely (it obviously didn't with Monica)?
 

PandaRosa

Even now a homosexual affair would be scandalous to a high-class politician, and back in the '90s it would be moreso. Clinton would be strongly encouraged to resign in order to preserve both his career and the dignity of the office of President.
As for Hilary, it would be a real test of her plans in politics vs her devotion to her husband.
 

The Uchronian

polyharmonic said:
Let's say instead of female intern Monica Lewinsky, it was revealed that the intern was male. How much larger would the repercussions be?

(Note that this doesn't necessarily mean Clinton is gay per se. He could be bisexual or just enjoy the power trip. Anyway...)

Would he be more likely to be convicted in the Senate? Would the scandal be so much more damaging because it involved homosexuality that he would be forced to resign? And would Hillary divorcing Bill be much higher of a probability? And would this destroy Clinton's legacy completely (it obviously didn't with Monica)?
Click to expand...

Well, I can't say it'd be good. Many more liberal people and at least some moderates would still be willing to give him a chance, especially if he made a public apology for cheating on Hillary. Even more so just 10 years later.

Conservatives, though, would be pretty much gone, even in the '90s, when anti-gay rhetoric had actually toned down a good bit overall compared to the decade prior(which would largely be reversed by ~2005).
 

Realpolitik

Banned
His goose is cooked. Not even Clinton is getting out of this one.

It's sad to say, but a lot of the recent progress on gay rights is, well, recent.
 

Generaloberst

Banned
He's destroyed politically and his reputation is probably tarnished. I doubt even Hillary would stay with him after that.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Realpolitik said:
His goose is cooked. Not even Clinton is getting out of this one.

It's sad to say, but a lot of the recent progress on gay rights is, well, recent.
Click to expand...
Funny thing. The public opinion of gay marriage lags that of mixed-race marriage by about one and a half decades. The legislative opinion lags by more like five.

marriage.png
 

CthulhuFhtagn

Banned
Saphroneth said:
Funny thing. The public opinion of gay marriage lags that of mixed-race marriage by about one and a half decades. The legislative opinion lags by more like five.

marriage.png
Click to expand...

Looks like my parents waited until the exact moment that public opinion was on their side before going through with it. :D
 

pattersonautobody

Didn't stop Barney Frank and I think he did it with a teenager...

But I agree, Clinton would be done. Today, not so much. They would be able to spin that into a whole "repressed feelings thing" instead of a "I betrayed everyone who was close to me and lived a lie for self gain" sort of thing.
 

Realpolitik

Banned
Saphroneth said:
Funny thing. The public opinion of gay marriage lags that of mixed-race marriage by about one and a half decades. The legislative opinion lags by more like five.

marriage.png
Click to expand...

As I've said before, it often takes time for changes to assimilate into society and in legislation. In things that have challenged accepted mores for centuries, even longer in terms of de jure law.

Though, again, it all depends. Goldwater supported gay rights*, as did Nixon in the later years of their lives, and probably would support gay marriage if around today. Weird, huh, that those two are more progressive than half the state of California in 2005?**

*("It doesn't matter whether you are straight, it matters whether you can shoot straight")

**(Nixon predicted 2000 as the year it would be legalized in 1970, in a conversation about the Loving decision about interracial marriage)
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Realpolitik said:
As I've said before, it often takes time for changes to assimilate into society and in legislation. In things that have challenged accepted mores for centuries, even longer in terms of de jure law.

Though, again, it all depends. Goldwater supported gay rights*, as did Nixon in the later years of their lives, and probably would support gay marriage if around today. Weird, huh, that those two are more progressive than half the state of California in 2005?**

*("It doesn't matter whether you are straight, it matters whether you can shoot straight")

**(Nixon predicted 2000 as the year it would be legalized in 1970, in a conversation about the Loving decision about interracial marriage)
Click to expand...
I think it's because, to conservative evangelicals, "Marital sex" is the only thing which is allowed, and which is always allowed (hence why they don't recognize such a thing as marital rape.) They've been doing that for decades.
To have teh gey people getting married - it means that suddenly there's people having teh gey sexxors and it's... it's... okay!

(The blog Slacktivist often covers this, and how it used to be that abortion was perfectly fine until suddenly it was retconned to never have been.)
 

1940LaSalle

…I'm waiting for someone to make some sort of comment about the irony of Billy Jeff having a gay affair while Hillary was/has been/is still rumored (take your pick) to have had one or more lesbian affairs…
 

mrmandias

polyharmonic said:
Let's say instead of female intern Monica Lewinsky, it was revealed that the intern was male. How much larger would the repercussions be?

(Note that this doesn't necessarily mean Clinton is gay per se. He could be bisexual or just enjoy the power trip. Anyway...)

Would he be more likely to be convicted in the Senate? Would the scandal be so much more damaging because it involved homosexuality that he would be forced to resign? And would Hillary divorcing Bill be much higher of a probability? And would this destroy Clinton's legacy completely (it obviously didn't with Monica)?
Click to expand...

He would resign. It would hurt his rep in the short term, but not too much. Being a dominant man of voracious appetites was always part of his appeal. Long term it probably enhances his reputation. There will be a lot of progressive mythologizing of the first black AND gay president. His youth popularity would be HIGH.
 

mrmandias

Saphroneth said:
I think it's because, to conservative evangelicals, "Marital sex" is the only thing which is allowed, and which is always allowed (hence why they don't recognize such a thing as marital rape.) They've been doing that for decades.
To have teh gey people getting married - it means that suddenly there's people having teh gey sexxors and it's... it's... okay!

(The blog Slacktivist often covers this, and how it used to be that abortion was perfectly fine until suddenly it was retconned to never have been.)
Click to expand...


Nope. This is chat-level political poo flinging.
 

Mr.brightside

mrmandias said:
He would resign. It would hurt his rep in the short term, but not too much. Being a dominant man of voracious appetites was always part of his appeal. Long term it probably enhances his reputation. There will be a lot of progressive mythologizing of the first black AND gay president. His youth popularity would be HIGH.
Click to expand...

That's if he comes out and says he is gay. He could claim to be bisexual. Other then that though I think your right.

This reminds me of family guy. Lets go to mars bro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top