it's almost like: Exactly! That's what's happened in response to MODERATELY left-wing heads of state, can you imagine the backlash to a true progressive? lol. All I'm proposing is that a 'swing' exists.

Another thing to note too, is that I think in the case of Obama.. he is a special case. Because while he was fairly moderate politically, the fact that a black man was elected Head of State obviously activated hard-right members of US society with the reality that 'the country' must be moving in a more progressive direction, which would explain how/why a racist, sexist, proto-dictator resonated with so many people (unfortunately).

But then, equally important is the impact that 45s racism and sexism has had on the country.. which responded by electing the most diverse congress in American history and potentially the first woman (or even woman of color!) for President. We should admit that this too is a 'backlash', even if its a backlash we like.

I'm not trying to advocate for yielding to hard-right elements of society, though. Just to resist the convenience of shrugging them off as old, dying off, ineffective, etc and remaining vigilant of the damage/loss they can cause to people's lives. We saw in Charlottesville there is a young, renewed, and politically active contingent keeping hard-right political leanings alive and modernizing them. I personally suspect that moderate heads of state are more stable for a democracy and that motivating an engaged electorate to spur change through Congress is a better strategy, but it's also possible that people could simply just brace for backlashes if electing more politically extreme candidates for the highest office.