Because the me too movement? Doesn't want to be in any position to be accused of anything? Male collegue equals witness? Does he have other staff with them to be witnesses in the case of such accusations? Do reporters generally accompany politicans on campaign trips? In a highly polarized era of me too, this actually makes sense to me. Men, especially men in positions of power are afraid to be around women. It is easy to say just act respectful. Don't do anything that is untoward. Still, men, especially those in positions of power are deathly afraid now of being falsely accused. He probably should have just declined and not offered that reasoning. It could come off as misogynist. Maybe he is. Or maybe this proves the point. Were his words taken out of context? Is he now being falsely accused of being inappropriate, the very reason he said no to begin with unless she didn't come alone?
What's idiotic about what he said? Or is there something else about him that causes you to brand him as such?
Everything about it is idiotic. It's like applying to be a cop but saying you don't want to have any contact with criminals. Also, having the lack of sense to say it out loud, even if that's his position, shows him to be an idiot. Finally, not being able to figure out a solution to the problem on his own (invite someone else along) makes him an idiot. barfo
He has no problem having contact with reporters; simply doesn't want to be alone with females to whom he's not married. I do the same. He specified his position quite clearly. He did figure out a solution; the reporter simply didn't want to acquiesce. He didn't request the ride-along; why should he have to provide the accommodation? I'm having difficulty seeing congruity between your statements and the words he actually used.
I don't think he explained himself very well. My truck, my rules probably wasn't a great line to use. I can understand the whole promise I made to my wife deal, but again it didn't come off well. I think if he was going to discuss it on tv, he should have juat came out with it. The me too movement, I don't feel comfortable being alone with a woman with such a small scale staff and alot of time would be alone with her in my truck. Of course it's not the same with a dude. A guy isnt going to accuse me of anything. I get it. I don't agree with how he handled it, but I get it. Maybe he should have provided a third person to be with them. Sounds like he has a grass roots campaign with little money. Maybe he can't afford to have a third person there. I don't know man. I would just say yeah and not say or doing anything inappropriate. But, his intentions are perhaps already being misconstrued. Again, does it prove his point?
I get what your saying. He came off sounding like an idiot. I don't think he did well voicing his reasons. He should have just came out with it. Been more clear about his uncomfortability in the era of the me too movement. Sounded like he could'nt accomadate her. He is running a small campaign with little money and couldnt afford to pay a person to be with them. Alot of their time would be alone. I see her side. I see his side. It makes sense...you can say just say yeah and act professional and don't do anything inappropriate. She is a professional reporter. She won't accuse him of anything. But, she didn't go on the trip and there are already accusations that he is a misogynist and he is inappropriate in his actions even if that wasn't his intention. The very thing ge was afraid of. Kind of proves his point.
I agree, Chris. The guy may or may not be an "idiot" and he's certainly going to have to polish his debate and presentation skills if he wants a successful political career. That said, in an era when claims of inappropriate conduct from decades in the past can derail a public service career, refusing to put yourself in a position where that could happen is pretty darned smart in my book.
The thing is, he doesn't actually have a problem at all. There is no detriment to him for her not to accompany him. SHE is the only one who has a problem, and SHE is unwilling to accept the solution.
My wife and I have the same rule, and it existed long before #MeToo. To equate one with the other is a logical fallacy.
I agree with this too. The guy has an absolute right to live by his promise to his wife. Much of the world may view it as hopelessly out of date, but it's something that I hold myself to as well. Seems like the obvious solution would have been for him to simply state this to the reporter and tell her that she's welcome to follow him along in her own vehicle.
I wasn't equating them. His/their rule is understandable, and it should be enough, but listening to him I could tell the me too movement was also a factor in his reasoning, but he seemed unwilling to be clear there. Maybe he was afraid of further criticism. Both his rule and me too were part of his reasoning, not that they are inclusive of each other.
Maybe 'idiot' was too harsh. I should have just said that this episode demonstrates he's quite bad at politics. barfo
True--there's always the risk of bad press in not giving a reporter exactly what they want. It's unfortunate that he's not skilled enough in debate to undercut her.
Which, to me, is a major difference. I'm certainly no idiot, but I would probably be terrible at politics, for many reasons.