Political scandals are a persistent feature of democratic processes, often generating significant public attention and potentially altering electoral outcomes. This article investigates the relationship between cognitive load and voters' evaluations of political candidates embroiled in scandal. Drawing on cognitive load theory, we propose that the influx of complex and often conflicting information surrounding a scandal increases cognitive load on voters. This heightened load can hinder systematic processing of information, leading to reliance on heuristics and potentially less nuanced candidate evaluations. We review existing literature on political scandals, voter perception, and cognitive psychology to construct a theoretical framework for understanding how voters process scandalous information. This framework suggests that while scandals inherently demand attention, the sheer volume and often contradictory nature of information can lead to mental overload, influencing how integrity and competence are perceived. The implications for campaign strategies, media dissemination, and voter decision-making are discussed.