They are literally experts in disguise. I guess this is the only way to survive is something as complex as politics because is a world similar to a jungle where only win the strongest, thus, the most expert in disguise.
To be honest we shall not applaud neither re-elect... it is disgusting when they promise something but end up doing literally the opposite. Also, in the modern era, politicians tend to be violent and divide people just with the art of disguise
I would not have the ability of dream making so much conflicts as politicians.

We believe we see politicians do certain things, and hear them say certain things, but then we discover they did, and said, something entirely different. Some of them are really good at it, and charge a lot of money to see their act. Should we applaud, or re-elect? — Don Wade

I see this same phenomenon in the activities of doctors, lawyers, builders, architects, police... I think it is a broad based human characteristic. Politicians are slightly more obvious examples because they are in the media, everyone wants something from them and everyone is trying to show them up.

We believe we see politicians do certain things, and hear them say certain things, but then we discover they did, and said, something entirely different. Some of them are really good at it, and charge a lot of money to see their act. Should we applaud, or re-elect?

isn't that saying something about the people believing it rather than politicians,etc them actually being experts?

Are politicians really magicians in disguise? I am not sure, but I also suspect that party clowns are failed politicians and philosophers are failed party clowns. CEOs of multinational conglomerates are failed philosophers, and 300 million workers in the USA are failed billionaires. Billionaires are failed writers and actors, and writers and actors are failed religious leaders. And religious leaders are failed social workers, and social workers are failed politicians.

On the other hand, politicians are over-achieving narcissists, CEOs are over-achieving billionaires, exploited workers are over-achieving losers, writers and actors are over-achieving paupers, religious leaders are over-achieving spiritualists, and social workers are over-achieving liberals.

We believe we see politicians do certain things, and hear them say certain things, but then we discover they did, and said, something entirely different. — Don Wade

Usually, they pretend to be leaders, but turn out to be followers. the trick is to push to the front of wherever people are already going. Populism is the name of the game.

I had come across one of those (often inciteful and correct) touchy-feely posts on my wife's FB page the other day. It was saying some up-lifting thing about not letting other's opinions about you affect you. You know what I'm talking about. So I start to thinking; Who epitomizes the internalization of that wisdom? Besides some yogi on mountain somewhere? I thought, you know those master politicians have skin so thick that it's nigh on to impossible to hurt their feelings. You can say the nastiest shit in the world about those folks and they shrug it off like water off a duck. Do you think Hillary or Mitch or Ted Cruz ever go home at night and wring their greasy little hands over, or cry about anything anyone said about them? Hell no. They might worry about how it would affect the polling, or $$$, but that's about it.

So, does that make them someone to look up to, like the yogi on the mountain top? Hell no!. Should we applaud, or re-elect? Applaud, no! Re-elect, maybe. It depends on whether they are our politician or the other guy's politician.

I'm more interested in how they got that way. I remember them in training, back in elementary school. They didn't do much *with* their peers. They might have been doing something *for* their peers. But it always seemed they thought their peer group were the faculty or administration, not the other kids. They may have seemed like teacher's pets to the other kids, but they were playing the teachers too (and the teachers knew it). And their alleged desire to do something for others never seemed altruistic. It seemed calculated.

They may or may not have been bullied; they may or may not have been excellent students. They may or may have not been part of a clique. But they damn sure didn't seem to care one whit about what others thought of them. They had their eye on the ball, and a higher prize, down the road; sometimes way down the road. They were long term, strategic thinkers. I struggled for a long time trying to come up with a word that encapsulated them. The closest I could come was "Conniver."

Their really hard to beat.

Usually, they pretend to be leaders, but turn out to be followers. the trick is to push to the front of wherever people are already going. Populism is the name of the game. — unenlightened

Could be true. Many believe "money" is the driving force...

The closest I could come was "Conniver." — James Riley

To me, a conniver is someone that has learned to survive in this world but does it in ways that are not moral, or nice, to others. Can they teach us thing? Maybe.....probably not - except maybe to not re-elect them.

To me, a conniver is someone that has learned to survive in this world but does it in ways that are not moral, or nice, to others. — Don Wade

Sounds like Mitch McConnel to me. Others would say Hillary.

Like god must be atheist said, many politicians are narcissists. This implies that they seek power solely for the sake of power, and do not care much, if at all, about who gets hurt in the process. Either way, I don't believe in the idea of political authority in general, since politicians are just flawed people like everyone else. There is no reason they should be obeyed as if all their laws are perfect.