JLF President John Hood writes today about the political impact of scandals. He believes scandals — such as the Ruffin Poole/Mike Easley mess — impact base voters much more than swing voters.
Ideological, highly partisan voters are better informed about the details of politics than swing voters. On both sides, they are more likely to know which party controls which congressional or legislative chambers. They are more likely to recognize the names of politicians below the rank of president, governor, or U.S. Senate. And they are more consistent consumers of political news, from newspapers, talk radio, public radio, or online sources.
So when a scandal breaks, they are far more likely to make the necessary connections. Person A is a scoundrel. He is a Whig. The Whigs currently control the House of Burgesses. If I’m a Whig, I’m depressed that my party contains scoundrels like this fellow. If I’m a Tory, I’m furious at the misbehavior of those dastardly Whigs and exhilarated at the possibility of removing them from power.
It’s also fascinating to watch the political calculations made by the state Democratic and Republican parties as they react to the scandal stories. The Democrats are keeping quiet. It seems party leaders think the less said the better. The Republicans, however, are very vocal. Both reactions are predictable. However, I suspect GOP Chairman Tom Fetzer is not only trying to rev up his base to ensure his voters show up at the polls, but he’s also got his eye on the swing voters who could decide some of the very competitive races.
