When Politics Becomes Personal

Do you want to get things done or fight your enemies?

There has always been a personal element to politics. The election of 1800 was particularly vicious, with incumbent President John Adams and challenger Thomas Jefferson—once fast friends, now bitter enemies—trading barbs through their favorite partisan newspapers.

Nevertheless, I’ve noticed that those who dwell on personalities tend to accomplish far less than those who are able to put personal differences aside and work toward actionable policy goals.

At the extreme end of substituting people for policies is Trump Derangement Syndrome. For those on the left who have made hatred of President Donald Trump their entire political identity, it no longer matters what actually happens, because they view everything through that lens. They fall for every lie—the fine people hoax, the Russiagate hoax, the drinking bleach hoax—and construct their political opinions based largely on what Trump believes. Figures such as Jonah Goldberg, Bill Kristol, David French, and Russell Moore, who at least paid lip service to socially conservative issues like abortion, gay marriage, and transgenderism, flipped on those issues rather than agree with Trump. Progressives who were once skeptical of big corporations and processed food additives now enthusiastically support them, simply because Trump opposes them.

Adopting a worldview in which your political positions are determined by people rather than principles creates serious weaknesses. It opens one up to manipulation. Populists and demagogues will exploit the tendency of people to reflexively follow or oppose particular figures. I’m sure you’ve seen man-on-the-street interviews where someone supports a certain position until they’re told who proposed it.

Viewing politics through the lens of personalities also leaves one open to misinformation. I remember an anecdote from many years ago—though I don’t recall the source. Sarah Palin, following her vice-presidential campaign, was an early supporter of the Tea Party movement. At one event she announced that we were going to “party like it’s 1773.” Some left-wing blog mocked her, accusing her of being so stupid that she didn’t know what year America declared its independence.

Right.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve watched one of Sen. Jim Risch’s staffers do his best to correct the record regarding the senator’s position on the SAVE Act, introduced by Sen. Mike Lee of Utah in January 2025. Big influencer accounts continually post a list of alleged opponents of the act—a list that includes Risch. The only problem? He signed on as a cosponsor the day the bill was introduced.

If you’ve already decided that a political figure like Trump or Risch is the devil, you’re less likely to slow down and think critically when you see posts online about how awful they supposedly are. As the quote often attributed to Mark Twain goes, “A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth puts on its shoes.”

Slow down. Think. Don’t let yourself be manipulated.

We see the same paradigm at play in Idaho politics. Sen. Brian Lenney came into the Legislature in 2023 as an iconoclast, taking aim at sacred cows left and right. It didn’t make him many friends. In fact, he saw a lot of legislation stymied simply because his fellow senators disliked him and wanted to prevent him from succeeding. Personally, I can’t imagine casting a vote on a bill based on my opinion of the sponsor, but it’s all too common in politics.

Perhaps no figure in Idaho politics is as polarizing right now as House Speaker Mike Moyle. A small but loud online contingent seems absolutely convinced that he is the devil incarnate. Not only does that mean everything he does is bad, but anyone who doesn’t forcefully denounce him is seen as complicit in his evil ways.

If you’ve seen much right-wing social media in Idaho lately, then you know what I’m talking about. It has grown to absurd heights, but that’s what happens when people substitute personalities for policies. This mindset is a severe weakness because it allows one to be tossed to and fro by political winds, like the biblical proverb of the man who builds his house on sand. If Moyle is the devil, then anything he does is tainted—which leads supposed conservatives to oppose income tax cuts, reductions in government waste, and the like.

I’ve noticed that people tend to label political figures as irredeemable villains over disagreement on a single issue. The more intensely one feels about that issue, the more disagreement feels like betrayal. For example, Rep. Don Hall introduced House Bill 489 yesterday, which would allow prosecutors and judges to add enhanced penalties for crimes committed while wearing masks. I have no strong opinion on this bill yet, and I intend to read it closely and watch the debate before making up my mind.

Yet if you ask some online political commentators, this bill is a nefarious plot by Zionist Jews to… do something. I’m not entirely sure what. Apparently, a pro-Israel organization supports the legislation. Despite the fact that many conservatives have called for something like this ever since the 2020 “Summer of Love,” when Antifa rioters ran wild in American cities and covered their faces with masks to avoid identification, some have concluded that it is problematic. Viewing the world through a single narrow lens distorts perception.

It’s the same effect as viewing every issue through the lens of how much you support or oppose the person who is promoting it. No politician aligns with you or me on every single issue. Heck, you and I don’t even align with ourselves on every issue. I even disagree with myself sometimes. What good does it do anyone to forgo moral and intellectual agency by allowing personalities to determine where they fall on the issues?

I’ve said from day one that my focus is on ideas, not people. If an idea is good, it doesn’t matter how much I might personally dislike the person who proposed it. Conversely, if an idea is bad, it doesn’t matter how much I might personally like the person behind it. Some of the legislators I’ve supported most over the past few years—such as Sen. Lenney, Rep. Heather Scott, and Rep. Josh Tanner—occasionally propose things I disagree with. Conversely, those I criticize most, like Sen. Jim Guthrie or Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen, occasionally propose something I can support. That’s simply the nature of politics.

A useful litmus test for whether you’re focused on people or ideas is this: do you want your least favorite politicians to vote correctly, in order to advance conservative policies? Or do you want them to vote incorrectly so you can use it in the next campaign?

This is one reason I have no patience for organizations like Young Americans for Liberty, which focus almost entirely on stirring outrage by attacking people rather than debating ideas. They have become adept purveyors of the Saul Alinsky style of iconoclasm: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” While that may be an effective campaign tactic, it runs contrary to my goal of giving you the tools to be a more informed citizen of our Republic.

Personally, it matters less to me whether you agree or disagree with me on any particular issue than whether you have actually thought it through.

Those who sell this kind of outrage are either not big on critical thinking, or they hope their audience isn’t. Either way, the result is the same: online mobs that are slow to think but quick to grab pitchforks and torches.

Is that really how our discourse should be?

I can’t control anyone but myself, and I wouldn’t try. As the 2026 legislative session gets underway, I will continue to focus on ideas and do my best to present the political world in a way that helps you be better engaged.

Incidentally, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson eventually reconciled, and the correspondence from the later years of their lives is an extraordinary record of a momentous time in American history. It’s also a reminder that life is too short to hate. Save your energy for things that matter.

Feature image created with Microsoft Copilot.

Bonus note for paid subscribers: