A recent survey in the US asked;

“Do you think an elected official who commits an immoral act in their private life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life?”

http://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2016/10/19/has-trump-caused-white-evangelicals-to-change-their-tune-on-morality/

The numbers who thought a politician could perform ethically in their public duties despite their acting immoral in their private life jumped from 44% in 2011 to 66% now.

Democrats went from 49 to 61% and Republicans from 36 to 70%. But interestingly, rather than political persuasion, it was religious affiliation that featured as the biggest factor.

While religiously non-aligned dropped from 63% to 60 Catholics increased from 42 to 58% and mainstream Protestants from 38 to 60%.

But it was white evangelicals who saw the biggest increase, from 30 to 72%.

Anyone who decides to stand for election, thus live off stolen tax-payer's money, has already behaved unethically in their private life!

Can they still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life?

Theoretically possible, but most improbable.

Well, strike me lucky, SR has started a thread!

Social psychologists were strongly involved in Obama's campaign. There are, I believe, ethical concerns there, especially for the voters manipulated by the powerful techniques.

Without bothering too much with SR's recommended reading for OLO members, the first consideration for prospective readers should be to put on their thinking caps and to power up their Bull*bleep* detectors.

First things first though, Western thinking is strongly rooted in character and personality, to make very unreliable assumptions about behaviour. In different situations and remembering that situations vary enormously, all of us, WE too, act differently and our behaviour cannot be forecast or anything of value learned from it that might be applied usefully and reliably later.

Forget the article and wait for the criticisms of social psychology Profs who are involved in recent research. That is if they even bother to respond to it.

Just to further enlighten people the Brookings Institute which conducted this survey is a one hundred year old institution, highly regarded and often ranked first in the world for its accuracy and it ability to influence policy.

http://ceoworld.biz/2017/01/31/100-influential-think-tanks-world-2017/

 “Brookings and its researchers are not so concerned, in their work, in affecting the ideological direction of the nation” and rather tend “to be staffed by researchers with strong academic credentials”.
Wikipedia

To try and debase the work of such an august institution speaks to a toxic ideological mindset indicative of those who flippantly dismiss academic rigour because it threatens their politics.

They really need to grow up.

I am interested to hear runner's take though. Here is someone who has in the past been so quick to pick the moral faults of all and sundry but has become one of Trump's biggest supporters on OLO. I would love to know the mental gymnastics that would have entailed.

Again, wait for the social psychologists folks. If it is worth anything they will be commenting. But I will venture right now that unreliable fluff like that article is entertainment and a waste of precious life time. There is so much of it about too.

It seems I have been given a further opportunity to expand on the veracity of the article.

Here is a little about the author.

“William A. Galston holds the Ezra K. Zilkha Chair in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program, where he serves as a senior fellow.”

“His current research focuses on designing a new social contract and the implications of political polarization.”

“He is also College Park Professor at the University of Maryland.  Prior to January 2006, he was Saul Stern Professor and Acting Dean at the School of Public Policy, University of Maryland, director of the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, founding director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), and executive director of the National Commission on Civic Renewal, co-chaired by William Bennett and Sam Nunn.”

“Galston is the author of eight books and more than 100 articles in the fields of political theory, public policy, and American politics.  His most recent books are Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge, 2002), The Practice of Liberal Pluralism (Cambridge, 2004), and Public Matters (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005).  A winner of the American Political Science Association’s Hubert H. Humphrey Award, he was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2004.”

Hardly a hack journalist writing a clickbait article.

There are of course some who will try and dismiss anything that challenges their mindset as 'fake news' or 'puff pieces', even something with as much weight as this piece. It really does show how blighted and shallow their perspectives are.

Less disturbing than sad.