Analysis on the Scandals (Poll)

Two weeks ago, The Walking Nine, broke scandalous news regarding two candidates: Tiger Bjornlund and Pablo Rothschild. Bjornlund was alleged to have a gambling addiction, and Rothschild, it was uncovered, has a second family living in Utah whom he kept secret from the public. Both candidates have responded to the allegations in press releases.

On Dec. 13th, students of 7th period took a poll regarding the scandals and how it affected their thoughts and opinions of the two candidates.

Bjornlund

After reading the article concerning Bjornlund’s scandal, 14 of 24 delegates of the 7th period class felt that their trust in Bjornlund has changed. These voters were worried about Bjornlund’s self control, especially around money. They want someone who is willing to devote his time to serve their duties for the nation, and who will put the country as their number one priority. Additionally, many said they want someone who is honest, stable and reliable; they are averse to a president who might take away the country’s money and who may be more likely to create corruption within the government.

However, 7 other delegates claimed that their reasons are that the voters either had no trust in Bjornlund to begin with, or they believed that everyone makes mistakes and thus accepted the faults in Bjornlund.

Lastly, only 3 people felt that their opinions might have changed but weren’t sure how they felt about it. One says “it seems like there is not enough evidence” while another says, “...until there is something that reflects on his character on a speech or stance, I am willing to overlook this” and the last person says, “When someone has a gambling addiction, it threatens to take over their entire life. I am therefore less certain about Tiger's priorities now.”

The next day, Bjornlund’s campaign quickly released a statement regarding the scandal. Although a majority of the class said their trust in Tiger had changed, the class as a whole generally felt he handled the scandal well, because he admitted his whereabouts and his involvements, yet refuted the statements made by the media and argued that he is still an exceptional politician.

Rothschild

Now, let’s dissect Rothschild’s scandal. Same as Bjornlund’s scandal, the majority felt that their trust in Rothschild has changed. However, the difference is that only 11 voters who felt their trust in Rothschild has changed, compared to the 14 voters felt their trust in Bjornlund has. Those who were concerned about Rothschild were worried that Rothschild may have other secrets up his sleeves because he kept his second family hidden for a long time. Another concern was Rothschild’s commitment to serving his nation, and whether he’s willing to put the citizens as one of his top priorities. They do not want someone who may be distracted a lot due to his family matters.

Interestingly, there is only one voter whose opinion changed for the better; the person said they had more trust in Rothschild. “If he can keep another family secret from his wife for years, he can be trusted to not give away our state secrets. I now have more trust in him,” the delegate said.

A third of the class said that their opinions did not change but that they were unsure about their trust in Rothschild. Some voters understand that since it is a private family matter, it was okay that it was kept hidden from the public. One voter felt that despite the scandal, Rothschild still qualified as an exceptional candidate for the presidency, while a different voter says, “There was no scientific evidence, such as a DNA test, to confirm the child was his.”

Lastly, only five voters felt that their opinions have not changed but with different reasons. One voter did not trust Rothschild from the start while another says, “It would not impact Pablo’s capabilities to run, nor his mental state, unlike Tiger’s scandal.” Similarly, another voter says, “Everyone makes mistakes.” The five voters just have different perspectives and justification as to why Rothschild’s scandal will not affect him and his campaign nor the country as a whole.

The next two days, Rothschild’s campaign released a statement concerning the scandal. Unlike Bjornlund’s statements’ positive responses, Rothschild’s statements’ are less positive. The majority felt that the statements were mediocre, ranking their response 3 out 5, and generally thought they weren’t on par with Bjornlund’s statements. Either way, delegates believed Rothschild’s campaign responded in a good timely manner.