In an age of so much perceived corruption and widespread distrust of politicians, people have expectations that elected officials can and should solve all their problems.

When people idolize politicians, putting them upon a pedestal and neglecting to hold them accountable for their failures, it often means that those who put them into power suffer first. When people see their politicians as infallible characters who can do no wrong, the consequences for democratic accountability can be severe.

These problems, however, are not exclusive to this era of modern technology and social media.

“I don’t necessarily see (political idolatry) as unique to the moment. I think extremism and the partisan divide is definitely stronger. I don’t think there’s any question that it’s intensified,” Democracy Toolbox CEO, Jeff Dalton said. “You can go back to John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama, and you would see examples of iconic national candidates that take on more of a cult-like status. There have been moments throughout U.S. history where we’ve had this kind of hero worship, or candidates being strongly branded along emotional lines instead of rational lines.”

This issue, however, could stem from within the very nature that is representative democracy. While direct democracy functions by having all citizens voting on laws and policies directly, representative democracy works by electing officials to make those decisions on their behalf.

“We have a hierarchy and therefore we have expectations for leaders, that they are somehow more powerful or more influential than we are,” Dalton said. “I think there’s naturally a tendency to see them a certain way, as coming in and having the power to change things and make things better.  People who latch onto the single hero to solve all problems often dismiss criticism of that person. They act like that person is infallible, act like anybody on the other side is nothing but fallible.”

According to the Pew Research Center, only 15 percent of Americans currently believe that elected officials run for office in order to serve the public. On the other hand, 63 percent of Americans believe that they run for personal gain, a stark difference from in 1958, where 70 percent of people believed that the government would always or most of the time, do what is right.

“I think that as long as you are being rational and not envisioning the candidate as the Savior, you’re more likely to be rational about your choices,” Dalton said.  “Give them credit for where they have been successful, but also hold them accountable for where they have not.”

Across both the Democratic and Republican parties, political idolatry has had a silencing effect on those who question or disagree with one side or those who can very quickly start to feel ostracized by the public because of their personal opinions.

Political consultant companies like Dalton’s have significant effects on how political figures are portrayed. If the end goal goes from serving the general public to the sole purpose of winning elections, idolatry stops being a side effect of politics and actually becomes the strategy itself.

“Good political consultants care more about just winning,” Dalton said. “Good political consultants care about winning but they also want to win with the overall goal being the common good and the health of our civic life, which is completely dependent on some level of honesty and transparency.”

If a politician’s position is elevated to a point where it resembles a superhuman level of status, it could lead to the erosion of the public’s willingness to question or debate with those in power.

“Some voters have been trained to think of their leaders as heroes and therefore expect their leaders to solve every problem, even when their leaders cannot do that,” Dalton said. “I think that sets them up for disappointment, but it also sets them up for a lack of power and agency in their own lives. The government cannot solve every problem.”

While some of the issues with idolatry trace back to how people see the government, blame can also be placed on citizens’ unwillingness to engage in their own communities. Whether that’s failing to participate in elections or neglecting jury duty obligations, the inability to serve their communities causes people to put their hope and faith into distant political figures.

“These are imperfect people; your elected officials aren’t going to solve all your problems,” former District Director for Representative Dan Branch Ryan Trimble said. “We can expect it for them to hopefully solve the key issues like is the water going to be running? Am I going to be able to get to work on time? Are the roads going to be clear and free of potholes? I think there are some core functions of government that we can rightly expect our elected officials to manage.”

Another cause for this problem of political idolatry could come from the very way that campaigns are held. Oftentimes, candidates will make promises during their campaign that they are unable to keep  in office. Inevitably, when problems arise that the government is unable to solve, citizens will blame the politician for these issues and when new people come into office, the cycle will continue as they find a new figure to place their trust and blame on.

“The reality is that almost every politician who has run for office in the history of the United States, has made promises that they failed to keep. They get there and they can’t really do all this stuff, but the voters kind of expect them to anyway,” Dalton said.

Dalton mostly works in district races where the size of the electorate is less than 100,000 or sometimes even less than 50,000. For these smaller-sized elections, it means that strategies like going door to door are far more realistic and communication between voters and candidates can be a lot more direct.

In recent years, however, with the growing prevalence of social media, some politicians have also turned to different platforms to further grow their brands. With the algorithm constantly feeding users with content they enjoy watching, it has become a massive marketing tool for these big campaigns.

“Your experience is curated to what you believe,” Trimble said. “I have to check myself, because I’ll be thinking about something and my next three things on Instagram are all about whatever the topic that I’ve clicked on.”

Some argue that the antidote lies in refocusing political energy away from political figures and more towards policy. When candidates prioritize tangible issues instead of  distant goals and grand narrative stories, idolatry loses its power.

“Did Representative Branch have a great story? Yes, he had a beautiful family, an attorney that worked hard throughout his career, very successful in his legal practice,” Trimble said. “But for me, it was about providing and looking for solutions to these big issues that impact everybody’s daily lives.”

Ultimately, responsibility for dealing with political idolatry still lies in the hands of citizens. Whether it’s due an uninspiring ballot or the absence of a figure compelling enough to deserve their devotion, nearly half of all eligible voters sit out during every election cycle. For many Americans, their civic participation has become conditional and if continued, could result in further idolatry.

“A healthy relationship with elected officials would be voters proactively doing more research,” Dalton said. “Most candidates do try to educate the public. Most real candidates try to raise money, try to advertise, try to send out information or whatever it is to educate voters, but I think the voters have to take a more active role in caring to learn more.”