‘He just says what he has to say in order to get himself elected. Once he will get there he will do like all the others, he will mellow down. Besides that, the system of checks and balances is too strong for one man to upset it.’
The first, and most obvious, problem with this line of reasoning is ‘why on Earth have we grown so accustomed with being lied that we find it acceptable’? Why do we brush aside so easily the lies professed by ‘our’ candidate – along with many other indiscretions, while we meticulously and vehemently point out those committed by the ‘opposition’? Weren’t we supposed to be making ‘rational choices’ when it comes to who governs the country?
The sad fact that there isn’t much to choose from doesn’t exonerate us from the consequences of our mistakes.
But our laziness has yet another – and even more malignant, ‘after-growth’.
By voting for a candidate who promises rather ‘unsavory’ things in order to get elected we not only encourage him to ‘make good’ those promises but we actually ask him, imperatively (😉 ), to do his ‘best’ in order to achieve as many of those promises as he possibly can.
Hoping that once elected he will ‘forget’ about (some of) them is both near-sighted and ‘double-standard’.