Image of politicians

Politicians are likely to have image of not-trustworthy persons because (1) the nature of the political process make successful politicians likely to flip-flop in order to achieve their political goals (e.g. Hilary Clinton who voted to DOMA and now suddenly became progressive); (2) political success brings personal power (e.g. access to lobbying money, fame, political power) and this can make people believe that politicians pursue personal interest rather than the collective one that is the very premise of the representative democracy.

Problem of the image of politicians makes endorsements not-effective – if voters trust certain candidate because they has a strong history of uncompromising performance it does not mean that they will necessary support another candidate because they were endorsed (e.g. Bernie Sanders endorsing Hilary Clinton – note, that most of Bernie supporters have finally decided to vote for her not because Bernie endorse her by itself, but because of the “the lesser evil” vote to prevent Trump from winning).

Currently Hillary leads against Trump with comfortable margins from 3% to 10% in polls across almost all battleground states including the 3 of 4 American Rust Belt states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (tied in Ohio). Those states can give Trump the 64 electoral votes – exactly the margin that Obama had winning over Romney 4 years ago! Michael Moore claim that the Rust Belt states are extremely likely to buy into Trump’s protectionist rhetoric but so far it has not happened.

Ted Cruz supporters are unlikely to vote for Trump: (1) Evangelists despise Trump’s promiscuous behaviour and his long pro-choice background; (2) Libertarians despise Trump’s protectionism and they have alternative candidate from the Libertarian party, Gary Johnson; (3) Ted Cruz himself did not endorse Trump.

Bernie Sanders supporters will never vote for Trump: (1) Progressivists despise his racism and misogyny; (2) Bernie endorsed Hilary.

National elections differ quite significant from the primaries as the electorate is different – they are not politically charged and naturally far-from-centre voters that participate in primaries, but rather neutral or non-politicized individuals.

Hilary is good in policy debates, but Trump never does policy debates – his key tactic is to rely on personal acquisitions and raise the level of emotions. If Trump turns the presidential candidates debates in a show of cross-accusations and offences it is likely to harm Hilary as (1) he is better that she in this stuff; (2) engaging in this kind of discourse is likely to increase her anti-rating even more; (3) she has a weaker position as she is in a position of power being state-official; (4) non-sophisticated neutral voters are more likely to buy populist rhetoric as it is way more simple.

It is not enough to defeat Trump – it is important to defeat Trumpism, to show potential new Trumps, their supporters and sponsors that this kind of rhetoric and behaviour will necessary lead to an electoral disaster. In order to do it the victory must be (1) as clean as possible to bring down the establishment conspiracy narrative; and (2) have the margin as big as possible.