Politically, you are right that for most of the electorate this ceased to be an issue years ago. But character does ultimately matter. I agree that when deciding between lesser evils, or even lesser goods, this might not be a deciding factor—but it is telling.
In the end, if it is a choice between family and career, the man who chooses career is wrong, and that flaw will usually tell, even in subtle ways. Your observation may also help to explain why, in Reagan’s words (whom my mother agonized over voting for because of this very issue) once our people get to DC they cease to be our people.
You are right that nearly 30 years does count for something—but home wrecking is a big thing, and late 20’s is old enough to know better. How much the character has changed—who knows? Certainly not me.
Still almost certainly better than the Dem, but if it were my district I would still hope for someone better.
I shouldn’t say that it doesn’t matter, because it does, or at least it should. But I’ve also reached the point where DC’s corruption (moral, spiritual or otherwise) is concerned, that if we’re to send someone there, I’d rather the person have sexual peccadilloes who votes the right way (pro-Constitutional/small government, et al) than an individual who may be moral under his own roof (faithful to his/her spouse), but who votes like a degenerate (anti-Constitutional/anti-life/profligate spending without end).
It’s sad that we might have to make such a choice, but all of this has been going on a lot longer than we care to acknowledge. Maybe someday when we reign in the power and excesses of that paragon of vice and avarice in Washington, DC, and restore power and control of their own destiny to the people, we can finally start to send majorities of people committed to morality both privately and publicly.