Barabak: A scandalous transformation! (Or not.) Significant changes in store

Recently, Katie Porter's campaign for California governor faced a turbulent moment. Following a tense television interview that gained viral attention, an older video emerged showing the former Orange County congresswoman using profanities and berating an aide. Simultaneously, the Maine U.S. Senate race was disrupted by alarming social media posts in which Democratic candidate Graham Platner made offensive remarks about police and Black individuals, alongside other crude comments. Investigations also revealed Platner had a chest tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol. In Virginia, attorney general nominee Jay Jones became embroiled in controversy when past text messages surfaced, including jokes about harming a political rival and disturbing references involving children.

Decades ago, such incidents might have ended political careers immediately. However, Porter continues to compete at a high level in California's crowded governor's race. Platner maintains strong public support and leads in Maine's Democratic primary polls. In Virginia, Jones was elected attorney general, defeating his Republican opponent by a clear margin.

Actions that once drew widespread scandal, such as recreational drug use or extramarital affairs, now often seem minor. The old strategy of confession, apology, and withdrawal is increasingly obsolete, as candidates sometimes benefit from confronting controversy head-on. Former President Donald Trump exemplifies this trend, having survived multiple scandals, two impeachments, major legal judgments, and numerous felony convictions.

Political strategists note that todays environment rewards resilience. Bill Carrick, who advises Democratic candidates, observes that only the most extreme crimes would justify withdrawal. Kevin Madden, a Republican communications expert, agrees that simply enduring scandal has become a common survival tactic. "Many politicians have realized that if you ride out one storm, another issue will inevitably arise," Madden said.

The shift is partly due to the way people consume news. Audiences can now curate information selectively, often ignoring stories they find unappealing. This fragmentation reduces the likelihood of a scandal reaching a mass audience. Scott Basinger, a political scientist, explains that scandals may have less impact because many people exist in information silos, limiting exposure to negative stories. The constant stream of information also contributes to fleeting attention spans, making it harder for any controversy to resonate widely.

Historical examples highlight the contrast. Gary Hart, who led the 1988 Democratic presidential race, dropped out following reports of an extramarital affair, attempted a comeback months later, and ultimately failed to gain support. In contrast, modern candidates like Porter, Platner, and Jones weather controversies, express remorse, and remain competitive.

Ultimately, voters weigh these factors when deciding on candidates. Whether choosing a governor prone to outbursts, a senator with a history of offensive remarks, or a president with a record of personal scandals, the decision reflects the evolving tolerance and priorities of the electorate.

Author: Sophia Brooks