It never Fails to Fascinate Me the way People react with Shock when an Elected Official, Politician, or Potential Candidate says something Outrageous. (At Least to The Listeners Way of Thinking.)
Yes, some off the Cuff remarks are Unprepared, and catch Supporters off Guard. Damage Control is set into Motion, and "CLARIFICATION" is Issued to Media Outlets, so that the "MEANING'' OR "INTENT" can be Ascertained. However, it is Rare for the Speaker to Disavow the entire Statement.
WHY? Because they are Generally Directing the Comments to Supporters, who may try to spin any Mistake as a Simple Misunderstanding, or more likely, BLAME THE CRITICS FOR MAKING SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING. IN THE MOST DESPERATE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEY WILL CLAIM SUCH CRITICISMS AS A "WITCH HUNT" AGAINST THIS "HEROIC" INDIVIDUALS "STAND."
Think about it for a Minute, and consider some of MOST SHOCKING OR OUTRAGEOUS STATEMENTS THAT YOU CAN REMEMBER. BUT DON'T THINK OF STATEMENTS ONLY MADE BY THOSE WHO REPRESENTED A VIEW OPPOSITE TO YOURS, CONSIDER CONTROVERSIAL LANGUAGE EXPRESSED BY INDIVIDUALS YOU SUPPORTED, AND HAD CONFIDENCE IN. Do you Find any Differences in the way you reacted?
In the End, the only Real Controversy lies with those MIDDLE OF THE ROAD VOTERS, WHO HAVE NOT MADE A DEFINITE JUDGMENT REGARDING THE CHARACTER OF THE INDIVIDUAL MAKING THE CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENTS. The EXTENT AND INTENSITY OF THE UPROAR REGARDING THE "OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE" USUALLY DEPENDS ON:
- PAST BEHAVIOR.
- THE IMPORTANCE OR SIGNIFICANCE OF THE OFFICE THE INDIVIDUAL
IS SEEKING, OR IS CURRENTLY OCCUPYING.
- THE NATURE AND TYPE OF GROUP AT WHICH THE CONTROVERSIAL
STATEMENTS WERE DIRECTED AT.