The Vote-Cost of Scandal

2003-06-03 Thread Bryan Caplan
The Lewinsky scandal, according to most public opinion scholars, actually increased Clinton's popularity. But even after Lewinsky, politicians have continued to resign or drop out of races in the face of similar scandals, and of course they did it for a long time before. What is going on? 1.

Re: The Vote-Cost of Scandal

2003-06-03 Thread Steve Miller
Do I have to avoid a preference-based explanation? What if I dig up some evidence of trends in human behavior that support my claim? Maybe what angers voters is not the scandal, but hypocrisy. Someone who is perceived as liberal on social issues is less of a hypocrite for having an affair than

Re: The Vote-Cost of Scandal

2003-06-03 Thread Bryan Caplan
Steve Miller wrote: Maybe what angers voters is not the scandal, but hypocrisy. Someone who is perceived as liberal on social issues is less of a hypocrite for having an affair than is someone who runs on a family values platform. Gary Hart was a liberal in good standing, but he is the

Re: The Vote-Cost of Scandal

2003-06-03 Thread AdmrlLocke
In a message dated 6/3/03 12:32:32 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Steve Miller wrote: Maybe what angers voters is not the scandal, but hypocrisy. Someone who is perceived as liberal on social issues is less of a hypocrite for having an affair than is someone who runs on a family values

Re: The Vote-Cost of Scandal

2003-06-03 Thread Steve Miller
But at least I've explained away Packwood, Livingston, etc. ;-) on 6/3/03 12:23 AM, Bryan Caplan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Miller wrote: Maybe what angers voters is not the scandal, but hypocrisy. Someone who is perceived as liberal on social issues is less of a hypocrite for