For most of history the attributes associated with political leadership were the command of language, personal integrity, and critical reasoning. Somehow all of that has been turned on its ear recently. Now the honored characteristics of leadership are rhetorical incoherence and blatant falsehoods, contempt for common decency, and a fuzzy sort of logic that deals in false equivalencies, straw man arguments, dismissive labeling, and a general disregard for risk/benefit analysis.
In the process of this change we are encouraged to accept that political language is irrelevant. Supposedly what a politicians says doesn’t matter. If we like his policies, we should ignore the words that surround and support that policy, even if they are hateful, divisive, and just plain untrue. If the supporting words are incoherent, that is strategic, making them deniable later if that denial better serves. If the supporting words endlessly repeat a lie, well eventually that repetition will make it the truth, which then becomes a form of logical persuasion and consensus building, in other words a necessary part of the democratic process.