Posted on 08/19/2013 2:56:56 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The most interesting question surrounding the campaigns of Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer is not whether they can win. Instead, it is whether their candidacies signal a shift in the values and priorities of voters when it comes to political sex scandals.
The main difference between past and current political sex scandals is not the frequency with which they occur, but rather the time it takes to recover from them.
In the past, once a politician’s sex scandal was revealed, it often took him (it’s almost always him) many years to regain credibility with the public, if he regained it at all. Today, the interval between revelation and redemption is vanishing.
Mark Sanford won a South Carolina congressional seat just four years after tearfully admitting to a scandal in which, during his second term as that state’s governor, he cheated on his wife, lied to the public about his whereabouts, and violated state ethics laws.
Eliot Spitzer declared his candidacy for New York City comptroller in July, just five years removed from resigning the state’s governorship after admitting to having patronized an expensive prostitution service.
Anthony Weiner’s bid to become the Big Apple’s mayor comes only two years after he resigned his congressional seat for sending sexually explicit photos of himself to numerous women before and during his marriage.
Some voters don’t seem to mind. As an elderly voter told Time magazine about Weiner’s Internet sexcapades, “Oh, I don’t care. Which one of us is perfect?”
Many other voters seem to agree. According to a 2012 study published in the Political Research Quarterly, sex scandals cost politicians just five points at the ballot box.
On many measures, public opinion has shifted toward greater acceptance of sexual license. Consider the rising popularity of sexting, the sending of sexually explicit photos via text message or Twitter. A 2012 Harris poll found that one in five Americans sexts.
That’s a significant increase from 2010, when a Pew Research Center poll found that 6 percent of American adults sent sexts and 15 percent received them.
But polls show that the vast majority of Americans still believe marital infidelity is wrong. A 2013 Gallup poll found that just 6 percent of respondents felt “married men and women having an affair” was morally acceptable.
It is impossible to know whether marital infidelity is more common than it used to be. But it is telling that more Americans feel comfortable admitting to others that they’ve been unfaithful. In 2008, University of Washington researchers found that the lifetime infidelity rate of men over 60 rose from 20 percent in 1991 to 28 percent in 2006. For women in that age group, the rate rose 300 percent, from 5 to 15 percent. Increases in infidelity were also seen among men and women under 35.
Sanford easily won his race in May, and the latest polls show Spitzer up 12 points over his closet rival. All of this raises the question: Are these guys really the best we can do?
It is reasonable to assume that Sanford, Spitzer, and Weiner were emboldened to run for office in part because, in the eyes of many voters in our hyperpolarized times, political ideology trumps personal integrity.
As one voter told BuzzFeed about Sanford, “I wouldn’t necessarily want him marrying my daughter or my sister. But his constitutional voting record is more than enough to carry the day versus the absolutely unconstitutional voting positions of his opponent. It’s no contest. It’s good versus evil.” Translation: The times are just too perilous to care that much about a candidate’s character.
But I submit that the opposite is true. We live in a time when public disillusionment with government is at an all-time high, and when twice as many Americans believe the country is on the “wrong track” as believe it’s on the “right track.” It shouldn’t be too much to ask that our leaders be not only competent but also moral, and that we give them authority over legislative bodies only after they’ve mastered control over their own.
Many voters are willing to tolerate bad behavior in their politicians in the belief that he or she alone can solve the country’s (or city’s) problems. Ironically, however, a significant portion of the problems we face, the very problems for which politicians are elected to solve, are related to the breakdown of the family and the destruction of reliable standards of right and wrong. Which brings us back to Anthony Weiner.
The would-be mayor was ahead in the early stages of his Democratic primary, demonstrating that voters were willing to give him a second chance. But he quickly slid from first to fourth after revelations that he continued his lewd behavior after the birth of his child and after he assured the media that he had recommitted to his marriage.
Just as revealing, a new Siena College poll finds that 68 percent of New Yorkers consider the national attention placed on the city because of the Weiner and Spitzer campaigns “embarrassing” and that 80 percent of New York voters view Weiner unfavorably — an all-time low among politicians.
To answer my initial question, the public may be more willing than ever to forgive politicians embroiled in sex scandals. But clearly, there is a limit to the amount of shamelessness voters will tolerate, especially when they end up being treated no better than a jilted spouse.
-- Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer is president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families.
Spits, or soars...
The jokes just write themselves...
Spitzer beats flaccid Weiner.
I’ll save Drudge the trouble:
“Spitzer Remains Firm, Weiner Droops”
size matters?
Spitzer ISN’T married to someone with the moslem brotherhood in her life.
Why would anyone vote for a guy who paid a hooker $4000.00 an hour as comptroller?
Why would anyone vote for a guy who paid a hooker $4000.00 an hour as comptroller?
RE: Why would anyone vote for a guy who paid a hooker $4000.00 an hour as comptroller?
Most importantly, why isn’t the press giving the time of day to a GOOD ALTERNATIVE FOR COMPTROLLER — John Burnett?
See here:
http://johnburnett2013.com/about-john/who-is-john-burnett/
Here’s why.
1. There was a catchy popular song written about Spitzer’s peccadilloes some years ago: “Love Client Number Nine”.
2. Spitzer’s name simply doesn’t lend itself well to a billion gazillion double entendre puns involving hotdogs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.