Leadership and Fake Imitations

Hortonian Politics

Political leadership in democracy is a tenuous business.  Obviously it rests upon votes--that is, having enough of them.  But before the votes comes something intangible.  Winning and maintaining popular support depends upon the perception that the political leader has integrity, is honest, and can be trusted.  Even opponents respect the political rival who has integrity.  When, however, integrity is lost there is little that can be done to restore it. Every legislative or policy direction becomes a hundred times more difficult to achieve. 

One of the reasons George Bush failed to unite the country was due to the widespread belief that he had stolen the election by a recount in Florida.  He was deemed duplicitous from the get-go.  President Obama is floundering now because a majority of people have decided that he is untrustworthy, deceitful, and a liar.
  Once that point is reached it is exceedingly difficult to persuade one's own party, let alone opposition politicians  to support anything proposed by a leader.  How can anyone believe what the President says about Obamacare from this point on?  How can anyone trust what he may assert going forward regarding secret warrant-less spying on US citizens and global allies? 

That's why astute politicians protect their honesty and integrity above all else.  When the crises hit, being known as "Honest Abe" or "Honest John" will make all the difference.  The electorate will be willing at the very least to give a politician perceived as honest the benefit of the doubt. 

Effective political leaders in an open democracy end up relying upon something far more important than votes--something which ethicists call Hortonism:

I meant what I said
And I said what I meant
An elephant's faithful
One hundred percent.

Accordingly, when a strong majority come to the view that politicians as a whole are corrupt, untrustworthy, and dishonest the Republic is on the cliff edge.