Clinton reveal more state secrets?

[Dill]

(10-24-2016, 10:34 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: You're preaching to the choir here. Even though I am not a Clinton supporter, I believe she would be less damaging to our country and is not as crooked as Trump. But, this is something that I think a lot of people defending either one of those two tend to forget, is that in the world of politics, in the world of public opinion and foreign affairs, the image is everything. The perception is reality. If someone appears to be not trustworthy because of those innuendos, then that perception is there.

When we are working on diplomatic relations with country x who is not on good terms with country y, yet there is an innuendo out there of favorable treatment to country y by the Diplomat in Chief (one of the roles of POTUS), then it can cause problems.

You are a thoughtful person, Bels, and I always respect what you have to say. In this case, though, I think we should be careful not to accept "perception" as identical to reality, while recognizing your point that for enough people it is. This would be one of the central points made in my ideal civics course, that we strive to make this distinction.

As for the effect on diplomatic relations, we live in a world now in which, if "perception" can be crafted and manipulated, it will be.  Any politician may him or herself have very little control over this.