Surviving Political Scandals: Why Some Transgressions End Political Careers and Others Do Not

Abstract

Objective. In this article, we examine several explanations for why some politicians survive political scandals and others do not. These explanations include the nature and magnitude of the scandal, the political environment, and how the politician responds to the scandal. Methods. To identify scandals, we use the Lexis-Nexis database of Associated Press State and Local Wire (APSLW) articles between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014 to examine political scandals involving politicians in 14 states. Using data obtained from relevant news articles, we estimate multivariate models in order to predict the probability of surviving a political scandal, as well as the electoral margin of victory for those who do survive. Findings. We find that men, those in safe seats, those in favorable political environments, and those with support of their spouses are more likely to survive a political scandal. However, early-breaking scandals, those that are more severe, those that require an apology or aggressive defense, and those that are sexual in nature decrease the probability of survival. Conclusion. While scandals put politicians at risk, there are factors that insulate politicians from the adverse effects of their transgressions. These findings offer insights into why some politiciansacross levels of governmentseem somewhat immune to scandals, while others have their careers abruptly ended because of them.

Could your candidate shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose votes? Identifying “lines in the sand” in ingroup candidate transgressions

“…For example, some studies report that fiscal transgressions (i.e., tax evasion, embezzlement) are perceived as more severe than other forms of transgression (Dobratz & Whitfield, 1992;Doherty et al, 2011). Other studies suggest that financial transgressions are more acceptable than candidates engaged in smear campaigns (Gonzales et al, 1995) or sexual transgressions (Newmark et al, 2019). Yet others report only minimal differences between different types of scandals (Carlson et al, 2000;Cucchi & Cavazza, 2021) and find, instead that partisanship is often a stronger driver of attitudes towards candidates than scandal type (Bhatti et al, 2013;Walter & Redlawsk, 2019).…”