No swing voter was going to vote for Trump on the basis that he's an honest candidate and Biden isn't.
i mostly agree with your post but, at least with a broad enough definition of honesty, this oversimplifies it, as some people see trump as more honest because they see him as more authentic. there was a recent article in nature to this effect (
link), and i think these passages are especially relevant:
This discrepancy between factual accuracy and perceived honesty is, however, understandable
if ‘speaking one’s mind’ on behalf of a constituency is considered a better marker of honesty than veracity. The
idea that untrue statements can be honest, provided they arise from authentic belief speaking, points to a
distinct ontology of honesty that does not rely on the notion of evidence but on a radically constructivist appeal to an
intuitive shared experience as ‘truth’. There have been several attempts to characterize this ontology of truth and honesty and the stream of misinformation to which it gives rise. A recent analysis of ontologies of political truth proposed two distinct conceptions of truth: ‘belief speaking’ and ‘fact speaking’.
Belief speaking relates only to the speaker’s beliefs, thoughts and feelings, without regard to factual accuracy.
Fact speaking, in contrast, relates to the search for accurate information and an updating of one’s beliefs based on that information.
The first of these two ontologies echoes the radical constructivist truth, based on intuition and feelings, that also characterized 1930s fascism. This conception of truth sometimes rejects the role of evidence outright. For example, Nazi ideology postulated the existence of an
‘organic truth’ based on personal experience and intuition that can only be revealed through inner reflection but not external evidence. Contemporary variants of this conception of truth can be found in critical postmodern theory and both right-wing and left-wing populism.* The second ontology, based on fact speaking, aims to establish a shared evidence-based reality that is essential for the well-being of democracy. This conception of truth aims to be dispassionate and does not admit appeals to emotion as a valid tool to adjudicate evidence, although it also does not preclude truth-finding from being highly contested and messy.**
* (note from me, adeleine; see also some religious doctrines)
** (note from me adeleine: i think the last two sentences go too far, that appeals to emotion are an important part of politics and democracy too, because facts alone do not ideology make, but i thought it was worth including as a notable point of view regardless)