I think there is a reason why there is such a thing as minimum voting age in most countries for local and national elections and that is to ensure that the one voting has the ability to make an informed decision, has the knowledge to differentiate what's right and wrong and has the basic instinct and/or intuition as to how likely that candidate would act out the moment he/she wins the election.
The moment these so-called candidates lay out their platforms to the general public, I think we already know (subconsciously) whether that candidate will (and more importantly can) carry out that said promises.
Take for example my country's(Philippines) current president in which he promised to get rid off drugs in just 6 months, I know for a fact that is just not entirely possible in just 6 months, and months later after he won the election he failed big time to keep his promise. Just hearing the election promise we can already draw a conclusion as to what's possible or not.
Another classic example and one that is often promised by some candidates is to increase minimum wage and lower the price of basic human needs like food. That would honestly be cool if they really has the means to do that, like they could only sign a document and BAM! Increase wage and lower daily cost!
But no! The one who won has no total control on big things like that! He could of course try but it will depend on the total economy's growth, so big promises like these cannot be trusted as the control do not lie on only one person alone, it's of a local/regional/national/international scale, in short many people are involved.
What can be trusted though are things that are possibly doable like fixing roads, creating or improving infrastructures or something. Promises that have visible results.
Election promises are used to get the party or person in power. Very few actually follow through on them.
It would be impressive if these promises would be fulfilled. Some leaders do make headway though and some promises are left for the second term which is their main goal.
In South Africa the ANC has been in power for 24 years and can't recall one promise being fulfilled. Whatever is important at the time becomes their focus and new promise it seems.
I have been impressed with what Trump has done as he has worked on some of his promises. i don't live there but picking up bits and pieces he seems to have done quite a bit more.
Most politicians are vague on what they promise and if we go back none are ever fulfilled. They are good at avoiding questions and just seem to promise and lie constantly. The masses are gullible for re electing them and should demand the changes required.
This depends on the person actually campaigning for a position in an office of power, elections sometimes see contestant make a whole lot of promises, they usually have a manifesto that contains a lot of agenda which they hope to achieve or actualize, but truth is, out of 100% only 20% of those promises are actually fulfilled expecially in African countries.
I'm definitely speaking for African countries I do not know how the promises in place like the United states or Switzerland really because electoral choices in the Places like the united states will have to fulfil electoral promises because they're are strict last on check and balances and lesser lesser level of corruption and if electoral promises are not fulfilled in places like the united states then the person may not go a second term and also stands the risk of being impeached as well.
But in Africa the level of corruption is higher and most of the promises made in the election campaign is only to buy the favour of people and attract higher votes as well as win electiom, sometimes not fulfilling these promises may not be their fault but the fault of the terrible economy they inherited, that's for example their predecessors so mostly bad economy, greed and lies are the reason why electoral promises are not fulfilled and they can not totally be trusted.
They are usually vague enough to leave wiggle room - and for a good reason. No single politician is in a position to actually promise much of anything because politics is all about finding compromises between different parties. There has to be flexibility to allow for the best possible deals to be made. When it comes to picking a politician or a Steem witness to vote for, we should study their track records to see if what they're really like.
Not 100%, since most of the promises are either unrealistic at given period of time that the politician will serve. In some cases, the politician's passion for serving will simply dial down and eventually fall into a state where they can't sustain the "push" for whatever promises they gave during the elections.
While in other countries, there are politicians who are really dedicated in sustaining the promises and will achieve their goal. But with lesser output or could be on a longer term / period of service.
Image source: Pixabay.com
It can never be trusted, they are all full of lies, all their saying is to get what they what immediately the staff has been given to them they lockup
Without compromising polarization and distrust, it seems very difficult for the elections to change the current situation without establishing contact between opposing political groups or identities, facilitating permeability, and creating a fair election environment. The outcome of the election is usually determined not by strategic maneuvers and campaigns, but by the two elections. For this reason, I will try to discuss why the election results are closely related to polarization and insecurity and what should be done for the democratic election environment between the two elections.