The dominant belief among many Americans is that an individual must be morally upstanding and of high ethical standards in order to be a successful leader of a country or an organization. While there have been numerous examples of virtuous and exemplary leaders throughout history, it is incorrect for a politician to hold this belief. Ethical and moral standards vary across cultures, and politics is no exception. For example, if a politician’s moral code is based on the religious principles of his constituency, he may well find himself in conflict with his own religious convictions. In the 2016 US presidential election, Republican candidate Donald Trump openly questioned the validity of religious values held by his opponents. Rather than using his position to push for his religious views, or to convince the public to adopt them, he instead seemed more concerned with making his opponent appear unintelligent. He attacked her for her positions on abortion and gay marriage, and during his campaign rallies, he frequently urged his crowds to ‘take their country back’ by repealing and replacing Obamacare. If a politician’s moral character is based entirely on religious beliefs, he may be unable to lead the country in secular ways. Furthermore, a politician may compromise his morals if he believes his constituents will reward him for doing so. For example, in 2001, when George W. Bush was Governor of Texas, he appointed a commissioner of agriculture who engaged in ethical misconduct. He purportedly used his authority as commissioner to influence the outcome of a lottery, ensuring that he would be elected. However, the citizens of Texas were not aware of the commissioner’s unethical activity, and Bush was re-elected. Therefore, a politician’s morals may be in conflict with his values, or vice versa

Finally, a politician’s personal ethics and morality may conflict with those of the people he serves. For example, many American voters have negative views towards illegal immigrants. They view these people as criminals, and many of them believe that the federal government is not doing enough to deport them. Politicians who base their constituents’ views of immigrants on their moral beliefs, or who refuse stricter measures to deport them, may lose their positions. In addition, a politician’s actions may have ethical consequences that are not directly related to his constituents. For example, the invasion of Iraq was morally justified by the rationale that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. However, that justification turned out to be false, which led to the deaths of thousands of American soldiers. Even though many of these soldiers lost their lives for a noble cause, the invasion itself remains an unethical action that has many negative repercussions for American society. Therefore, a politician’s ethical and moral code may be in conflict with his constituents and his country, and he may not be able to effectively represent the interests of both.