Why are unpleasant politicians so popular?

[EricK]

There are certain politicians who, even ignoring the policies they espouse, are just downright unpleasant individuals. And yet despite this they seem to attract a large, vocal, fanatical following. Obviously, the one most in the news right now is Donald Trump, but to name some more, from both sides of the political spectrum, (and apologies for the UK-centric examples, but it's what I know best):Nigel Farage, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway.

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

 

[fromderinside]

There are certain politicians who, even ignoring the policies they espouse, are just downright unpleasant individuals. And yet despite this they seem to attract a large, vocal, fanatical following. Obviously, the one most in the news right now is Donald Trump, but to name some more, from both sides of the political spectrum, (and apologies for the UK-centric examples, but it's what I know best):Nigel Farage, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway.

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

We are all biased to self interest so we tend to be mad. Those who succor that mad are appreciated.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Miserable people love company.

 

[barbos]

Because people got tired of pleasant motherfuckers politicians?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Because when you're angry and scared, you want people in charge who are angry and scared about the same things you are.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I think it is because they seem more real and less politician-like? The politician that kisses babies and says whatever the voters want to hear can really get on some peoples' nerves, and then along comes some guy saying ridiculous over the top horrible things... he's not pretending to be what he's not... he seems more real... he seems like he "tell it like it is" or at least "calls it as he sees it" etc. That sense of genuineness does a lot for some people, even if it means they are supporting a horrible person (like Trump).

 

[iolo]

There are certain politicians who, even ignoring the policies they espouse, are just downright unpleasant individuals. And yet despite this they seem to attract a large, vocal, fanatical following. Obviously, the one most in the news right now is Donald Trump, but to name some more, from both sides of the political spectrum, (and apologies for the UK-centric examples, but it's what I know best):Nigel Farage, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway.

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

People appeal to those like them. Falange is a Nazi, Ken Livingstone decent and practical, Mr Galloway, don't know. Trump appeals to sexist, racist, chauvinist inadequates. Next question?

 

[RVonse]

Because when you're angry and scared, you want people in charge who are angry and scared about the same things you are.

+1 This.

Or at the minimum if you are mad as hell about particular issues you sure aren't looking for a pleasant know nothing luke warm personality. You want a type A alpha dog personality who is talking exactly how you feel to relate with.

 

[dismal]

I think to some degree the cesspit of partisan politics makes people into assholes, and in most cases the partisan leaders have been in the cesspit a long time.

I also don't think many partisans are sensitive to the assholery of people who say partisan things they agree with, so they don't realize the asshole in question is not representing them well to the public at large.

Look at, say, this forum.

 

[JonA]

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

Maybe people who vote are considering qualities other than whether they'd want to have a beer with the candidate. (?)

 

[iolo]

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

Maybe people who vote are considering qualities other than whether they'd want to have a beer with the candidate. (?)

Quite. I have known several political figures in my time, and enjoyed a beer with none: it is not what they are for.

 

[EricK]

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

Maybe people who vote are considering qualities other than whether they'd want to have a beer with the candidate. (?)

But it's not so much that they vote for them, but they seem devoted to them. They follow them around to rallies; make excuses for their vile behaviour and so on.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

They make it ok, even patriotic to hate.

All Trump (and we will use him as a prime example) does is parrot back to his supporters their own professed prejudices, bigotries and fears AND since he in a major party nominee for POTUS when he does that, he legitimizes those beliefs, and even elevates them. "Mary, I know it has been hard finding working, but you know there were plenty jobs for you but for the MEXICANS!" "John, you need your gun to protect yourself and your family. In fact, you need more guns, and more guns still because you know how those WELFARE QUEENS keep poppin' out those CRACK BABIES."

You don't feel safe (nevermind that you are) and the reason why is THOSE PEOPLE and I'm gonna get rid of them for you. Vote for me.

 

[Derec]

Mr Galloway, don't know.

Anti-semite, apologist for the likes of Assad or the Iranian theocracy. He is more like a nazi than Farage could ever be.

- - - Updated - - -

There are certain politicians who, even ignoring the policies they espouse, are just downright unpleasant individuals. And yet despite this they seem to attract a large, vocal, fanatical following. Obviously, the one most in the news right now is Donald Trump, but to name some more, from both sides of the political spectrum, (and apologies for the UK-centric examples, but it's what I know best):Nigel Farage, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway.

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

You forgot Hillary. Very unpleasant, and fails the beer test unlike Trump. Face it, having a couple of brewsies with him would be fun if nothing else.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Anti-semite, apologist for the likes of Assad or the Iranian theocracy. He is more like a nazi than Farage could ever be.

- - - Updated - - -

There are certain politicians who, even ignoring the policies they espouse, are just downright unpleasant individuals. And yet despite this they seem to attract a large, vocal, fanatical following. Obviously, the one most in the news right now is Donald Trump, but to name some more, from both sides of the political spectrum, (and apologies for the UK-centric examples, but it's what I know best):Nigel Farage, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway.

To turn around a phrase used about GW Bush, these are not people I'd want to sit down and have a beer with - or indeed spend any time at all with.

So what explains their popularity?

You forgot Hillary. Very unpleasant, and fails the beer test unlike Trump. Face it, having a couple of brewsies with him would be fun if nothing else.

I agree she is unpleasant, but popular? come on now! Clinton may be many things, and among them one the most polarizing figure in modern times, but she ain't popular

 

[Derec]

I agree she is unpleasant, but popular? come on now! Clinton may be many things, and among them one the most polarizing figure in modern times, but she ain't popular

She is popular among a certain segment of the electorate and unpopular elsewhere, just like Trump. And given recent polls, she is more popular overall than him.

 

[EricK]

I agree she is unpleasant, but popular? come on now! Clinton may be many things, and among them one the most polarizing figure in modern times, but she ain't popular

She is popular among a certain segment of the electorate and unpopular elsewhere, just like Trump. And given recent polls, she is more popular overall than him.

I think there is a difference. The Democratic Party is popular with some segments of the electorate, just as the Republican Party is. And the polls largely reflect that. But she doesn't appear (from this distance) to have the sort of personal support that Trump does.

Just like in the UK, the Conservatives are currently way ahead in the polls, but the Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has a far more devoted personal following than the Conservative leader does. He is also personally hated far more than Mrs May is (which based on the sorts of people he hangs out with is probably entirely justified).

Indeed another similarity is that Corbyn is hated by a large number of politicians in his own party - just as Trump appears to be. Whereas Clinton doesn't appear to suffer that.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I agree she is unpleasant, but popular? come on now! Clinton may be many things, and among them one the most polarizing figure in modern times, but she ain't popular

She is popular among a certain segment of the electorate and unpopular elsewhere, just like Trump. And given recent polls, she is more popular overall than him.

Being seen as being the lesser of two evils is NOT the same as being popular. Obama in '08 was popular. Sanders during the primaries was popular. Clinton is tolerated. When Candidate Clinton can pull numbers world wide in the tens and even hundreds of thousands to a rally? Then we can call her popular.

And keep in mind, Clinton isn't winning. Trump is losing. Again, there is a difference.

 

[Derec]

She is popular among a certain segment of the electorate and unpopular elsewhere, just like Trump. And given recent polls, she is more popular overall than him.

Being seen as being the lesser of two evils is NOT the same as being popular. Obama in '08 was popular. Sanders during the primaries was popular. Clinton is tolerated. When Candidate Clinton can pull numbers world wide in the tens and even hundreds of thousands to a rally? Then we can call her popular.

And keep in mind, Clinton isn't winning. Trump is losing. Again, there is a difference.

I get your point, but if Hillary wasn't popular among some she'd never have won the primaries in the first place, DWS or no DWS.
She seems to be rather popular among black democrats and older democrats, especially older female democrats.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Being seen as being the lesser of two evils is NOT the same as being popular. Obama in '08 was popular. Sanders during the primaries was popular. Clinton is tolerated. When Candidate Clinton can pull numbers world wide in the tens and even hundreds of thousands to a rally? Then we can call her popular.

And keep in mind, Clinton isn't winning. Trump is losing. Again, there is a difference.

I get your point, but if Hillary wasn't popular among some she'd never have won the primaries in the first place, DWS or no DWS.
She seems to be rather popular among black democrats and older democrats, especially older female democrats.

People voted for Clinton because they liked people who were campaigning for Clinton and many people didn't know Sanders. The Clintons have been favor banking for forty years and they called those favors in. The people who voted for Obama have not forgotten the stunts the Clintons pulled in '08, but they like Obama, they like Corey Booker, they like Bill deBlasio, they like the Castro brothers, they their favorite celebrities, so they voted for Clinton.