Political Persuasion

There are those that believe that politicians are people who reflect the views of others.  People whose job it is to take the views of the people they represent and to argue their case and further their interests.  I don't believe that is true.  I think the only instance where this can actually be said to be true is in the case of lobbying, where a politician has been paid or has received donations from businesses and other interest groups to be a proponent of their interests.  In most countries however this is illegal and can actually be punished with a prison sentence. 

I would argue the real job of a politician is to influence people and change their point of view or control them, not the other way around.  For as long as I have been politically aware, I have observed politicians very much campaigning on policies that were already decided.  I have never seen a politician or their campaigners knock on a door and ask the constituent for input on their policies, I have however seen many knock on doors and try to convince the constituent that their manifesto is the answer to all of their problems.

Politics in general whilst at first can be viewed as a place to debate issues and a place that represents points of view that reflect voters, is not what it appears when you start to scrutinize it.  Being disingenuous is one thing, but the job of a politician goes far beyond and actively involves manipulation.  Issues are not debated with voters, they are decided by the party itself which is only a small number of people, and those people are almost always congruous in their viewpoints.  A party will have a particular leaning in regards to key areas and those who are members will not deviate very far from that leaning.  Even beyond the parties themselves, when you consider polling organizations and their job, one might at first buy into the belief that a polling organization carries out its job in order to inform policy creation, but again I would argue that is not the case.  Polling organizations in reality are simply used to measure the effectiveness of the politicians' abilities to manipulate the view point of those who are potential voters.  I have never seen a political party change its position based on polling, I have however seen parties ramp up their campaigning and their rhetoric in an attempt to win over public opinion to their side, and in some cases that proves successful and the polls shift.

While there are those that argue that you should vote and that you should always vote and that failing to do so is a failure on your part.  The thing is, politics in general plays heavily on the idea of lesser evil.  That their ultimate goal is to convince you the opposing side is entirely wrong and that there would be anarchy and economic ruin, and society would fall apart if the opposing side were to win.  In other words you're pressured into taking a side that you might not even agree with just to avert disaster.

Personally I don't believe that voters are buying into that mentality anymore.  I believe that the EU referendum in the UK and the 2016 Presidential election in the USA are two key examples of the failure of the lesser evil argument.  There were people who campaigned intensively on the premise of convincing others that the opposing side would be a complete disaster, it didn't work though.  In the case of the EU referendum there were those who did not want to leave who just didn't buy the case for remain.  In the case of the US election there were those who did not want You Know Who to be President but they didn't like Hilary Clinton so they didn't vote at all.

Both of these things I think are demonstrative of the disillusion with politics that has been growing among those who could vote but choose not to.  The argument of being the lesser evil option isn't enough, you actually have to be appealing now which hasn't been the case for many decades in politics if it ever was.  You have to actually convince people to vote for you.  The idea that voters are set in their view and will never change it is something which has been persistent in political commentary throughout my life, to the point where only those identified as "swing voters" are actually targeted.  I don't believe that strategy has any merit any longer.  I believe politics has now shifted to the point where a candidate has to appeal to as many people as they can, they can no longer depend on a traditional base to support them.  The job of a politician is not to reflect the views of others, if it ever was, it is now a job of persuasion, and that persuasion needs substance.  For people to shift from doing what they did before, you need to give them motivation to change, and the notion of lesser evil won't provide that motivation.