Style, Not Substance, Is Today’s Political Superpower – Inside Sources

What are voters looking for in today’s America? The answer may surprise you.

Pundits and the Washington establishment focus on policy issues and disagreements, hoping to appeal to voters. What is the best way to reduce the nation’s debt? How can Medicare be saved? What are the threats to gun ownership or freedom of speech? All of these things matter, and we do need answers, but most voters just don’t care anymore. The endless political debates about policy disagreements are just “blah, blah, blah” to them.

A recent series of focus groups conducted by Sarah Longwell and reported in The Atlantic makes things clear. Voters don’t really care about candidates’ policy positions. What they want is someone who will fight for them, someone who is emotionally invested in helping their lives get better. Republicans believe they have found this in Donald Trump. Democrats are still looking for a leader. Voters are tired of moderate politicians, because they have come to associate moderation with tepid commitment. Moderates are boring.

And democratic norms are boring. Many voters don’t see the value in strict adherence to the rule of law. Where does this get us? If violating the Constitution is what it takes, then so be it. Voters care more about politicians who seem committed to results than to process. The question is: at what cost?

This is why voters are often attracted to more extreme politicians. In New York, for example, many voters don’t care if Zohran Mamdani’s policies are extreme; what they are impressed by is his image. He presents himself as authentic, one who speaks his mind and isn’t afraid to take on the establishment. In this respect, he has some of the appeal that Trump has. This is also true of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who presents herself as someone passionate about fighting for what she believes in.

Another important thing that voters want, as Sarah Longwell’s focus groups reveal, is a very personal relationship with candidates. They want to feel as if they know them intimately. Again, Trump understands this and has succeeded more than any previous president in establishing a personal connection with voters. His use of Truth Social is truly brilliant. Voters can relate to him multiple times a day and even through the night. He is always there, commenting on social and political issues and telling them who he likes and who he doesn’t. 

Are voters really relating to the real Donald Trump? We have no way of knowing how much of this is actually a calculation by Trump to achieve a desired effect, but for most voters it is not seen as calculation. For them, he’s “the real deal.” He is “telling it like it is.” And they love him for it. 

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, has attempted to emulate Trump’s use of X by posting his attacks on Trump there — some of them serious and some of them satirical. He has had success with this, and many Democrats see him as the kind of fighter they need in the next presidential election.

Voters don’t care any more about candidates who have worked quietly behind the scenes for years to achieve public policy successes. They want candidates who are visibly passionate — even extreme — and with whom they feel a deep connection. Candidates who can project this image will likely be more successful than those who do not.

The problem, of course, is that candidates can appear authentic and passionate, without actually being so. They can appear to be fighters when they have absolutely no idea what is worth fighting for. Or, worse, they can be true fighters for dangerous policies. If voters cling to this emotional set of criteria for their candidates, they will almost certainly vote unwisely.

However, rare politicians are both substantive and passionate, moderate yet capable of fighting the good fight. We used to call them statesmen. They can project an image that is genuinely honest. And they can have a profound understanding of policy issues and still avoid boring voters when they discuss them. Not everyone who claims to care about the common person is a fraud or manipulating voters. The problem is knowing how to identify which is which.

As citizens, we have to fight the impulse to vote for style over substance, but we can still hope to vote for substance with style. The only way we can make this happen is to strive to be active and informed citizens. 

The future is in our hands.