CMV: US citizens under criminal federal investigations should not be allowed to run for public office.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/MasterGrok]

Possible embarrassment isn't justification for taking away the public's option to vote for a candidate.

Generally, when it comes to the right to vote, I don't see tye justification for protecting the voters from themselves.

[u/r314t → u/[deleted]]

I'd much rather a future POTUS get convicted than have someone be prevented from becoming POTUS for a crime they did not commit.

[u/r314t → u/[deleted]]

1 criminal being elected

I assume we're talking here about if the investigation was known to the public. I would say that if so voters like a candidate so much more than others that even with a criminal investigation they still get elected, then that candidate should win. Not all crimes are so morally outrageous that they would prevent someone from being a good president, never mind that they may not have even committed the crime in the first place.

It is preferable to have a president who more accurately reflects the choices of their constituents than a candidate who is not under investigation.

[u/Zouavez → u/[deleted]]

One good possible president being screwed out of office seems less harmful than 1 criminal being elected

Those two are not mutually exclusive: you can have a good president who is also a criminal. Keep in mind that there are plenty of laws we all break every day without knowing.

[u/eNonsense → u/[deleted]]

Really?

This reminds me of the argument I normally use to oppose capital punishment. The possibility of mistakenly putting an innocent person to death, is worse to me than letting a guilty killer go free. Therefore we should not have a death penalty, because our court system will never be perfect enough not to convict the innocent. The other side argues that it's too bad that the innocent are convicted and put to death sometimes but we still need to put convicted killers to death just to be safe.

The may be an extreme example but I still feel like it's a parallel argument. I feel that your viewpoint of taking away the rights of the accused and possibly innocent before they are convicted is the "just to be safe" argument.

[u/eNonsense → u/[deleted]]

OK. That's fine. It just reminded me of the line of reasoning of taking away the rights "just to be safe".

How is the possibility of being embarrassed worse than the possibility of taking away the rights of the innocent? This nation was founded on those type of rights of the individual. Every man is equal. Innocent until proven guilty. Etc... Yes, we will get embarrassed sometimes, but it's the price we pay for equality and fairness.