Quantcast
Connect with us

Ashley Madison data reveals Republicans are more likely to cheat on their spouses

Published

on

One thing that came out of the hack on Ashley Madison was the information that the site was overwhelmingly dominated by male users. Data is now revealing, however, that among those men (and women) currently using the site, the majority were Republicans.

Ashley Madison is the world’s leading website for married people seeking additional relationships. According to their numbers, for all of those conservatives who claim “family values,” they’re more apt to compromise their morality if it is expedient for them to do so.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Republican party has often touted its traditional values with a foundation based on Judeo-Christian ethics, ethics of course that do not align with adultery,” noted a release on the topic.

However, 89 percent of cheaters “say that opposing political views would compel them to cheat on their spouse.” Of those Ashley Madison users, 60 percent self-identify as Republicans. Those that are cheating also indicated that they’d prefer to cheat with a fellow Republican (55 percent).

“It’s surprising to see so many members of AshleyMadison.com voting Republican. The liberal sexual behavior of our members was not exactly reflective of their political affiliation,” says Isabella Mise, Director of Communications for Ashley Madison. “It was expected that cheating may have been more prevalent amongst Democrats who may be more open to the idea of infidelity, but that just wasn’t the case.”

Presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Donald Trump had extra-marital relationships, and voters seemed to indicate they didn’t care about it in the 2016 election.

The Republican Party and the religious right has come under fire in the past year for hypocritical views on morality and family values, while having a willingness to compromise those values for Trump.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

George Conway reveals how Mary Trump’s book and the Supreme Court prove the ‘walls are closing in’ on the president

Published

on

Republican lawyer and "Lincoln Project" co-founder, George Conway, wrote in a Washington Post column Thursday that there are a lot of commonalities in Mary Trump's forthcoming tell-all book and the Supreme Court decision passed down in President Donald Trump's case with New York prosecutor Cy Vance.

Mary Trump, who is a clinical psychologist, delivers "professional judgments about the president's indisputable narcissism and, perhaps, sociopathy dovetail with those that other experts have reached before," wrote Conway. "Yet it's not the possible diagnoses that give Mary Trump's book its punch. It's the factual detail — detail that only a family member could provide."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Tennessee Republican says he hasn’t ‘really studied’ whether the Civil War was about slavery

Published

on

On Thursday, The Tennessean's Natalie Allison reported that Tennessee state Rep. Mike Sparks, who makes a habit of complaining that "young people" and "journalists" don't bother to study history, could not answer a basic question about what the Civil War was fought over.

"Was the Civil War about slavery?" asked a reporter.

"I haven't really studied it," said Sparks.

"You said you know history!" said another reporter.

"I just think we need to all study history," said Sparks, still not answering the question. "There's different contexts."

This comes during a debate over whether to remove a bust of Confederate general and suspected Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrest. Another lawmaker, state Sen. Joey Hensley, defended Forrest, arguing that "3,000 Blacks attended his funeral" — a common but unproven claim of Confederate sympathizers.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Law professor schools Trump’s legal team on why their Supreme Court arguments failed

Published

on

Fordham Law Professor Jed Sugerman noted on Twitter, that Thursday's Supreme Court ruling should be a "teachable moment" for the lawyers at the Mazars firm, which fought the disclosure of President Donald Trump's financial information.

During the oral arguments with the High Court about the New York case, Trump attorney Jay Sekulow argued that as president Trump was above the law.

"In both cases, petitioners contended that the subpoenas lacked a legitimate legislative purpose and violated the separation of powers," the Supreme Court said in the decision. "The President did not, however, argue that any of the requested records were protected by executive privilege."

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image