The common assumption that a popular politician is naturally a powerful one reflects a persistent misund­er­standing of how contemporary political systems function. High poll numbers, large rallies and dominant social media metrics are frequently misinterpreted as a mandate that allows a leader to govern as they please.

Political science demonstrates that this is often an illusion. Being liked by the public is what political theorists call a “soft asset”, because it frequently fails when it collides with the realities of how government actually operates.

As the American political scientist Robert Dahl argued in 1990, the idea of a heavy mandate is often a “pseudo-concept.” It rarely functions as a practical tool for making laws. In reality, a leader’s power is not a blank cheque signed by the voters. It is a limited currency that must be spent within a complex web of rules and competing interests.

The American political theorist Richard Neustadt observed that a leader’s true power is not the power to command but the power to persuade other officials. A president or prime minister may have millions of admirers in the streets, but if the PM or president cannot persuade the bureaucracy, the legislature and the judiciary to cooperate, they usually struggle to achieve their goals. Neustadt maintained that actual change requires navigating institutional friction and laws. This is a reality that cannot be addressed by public applause alone.

From Barack Obama to Imran Khan, political history shows that mass appeal rarely translates into effective governance because public approval is a fragile asset, often neutralised by institutional constraints and perception gaps

From Barack Obama to Imran Khan, political history shows that mass appeal rarely translates into effective governance because public approval is a fragile asset, often neutralised by........

© Dawn (Magazines)