There's “nothing orderly” about Donald Trump's presidency process, wrote the Washington Post's Dan Balz, going on to add, “Trump always said he liked to be unpredictable.”  It's fitting in its own strange way, since so much of politics globally remains in a state of flux.  Citizens, too, remain uncertain in their sentiments – a trait causing political office seekers to cast about wildly in their efforts to find a constituency to elect them.Call them the “shape-shifters,” of whom Trump is perhaps the most obvious.  They are everywhere in politics these days, seeking pockets of voters who might propel them to victory or incumbency and then modifying their language and principles to suit.  Such a tendency has been endemic in politics from the beginning, but is increasingly becoming standard practice in a volatile world where vote getting at any cost often comes at the expense of solid policy.This tendency was helpfully identified by author and journalist Susan Delacourt in her recent book, Shopping for Votes: How Politicians Choose Us and We Choose Them – a fascinating journey into how our politics is taking us into unknown territory.  Amazon's description of Delacourt's book posits the danger for modern democracy: “The book explains how parties slice and dice their platforms for different audiences and how they manage the media.  The current system divides the country into 'niche' markets and abandons the hard political work of knitting together broad consensus or national vision.”The term “shape-shifter” was first used publicly in 1887 but has now become standard fare.  In modern politics this constant morphing has become an essential tool in the endless quest for ascendancy.  Everyday, politicians have to shape their message and their image to the multitude of groups and individuals and hope to keep some semblance of policy coherence.  Sometimes it can be an impossible task.  The pressures seem endless: answering questions regarding climate change, international trade, foreign aid, terrorism, healthcare, pensions, and even the price of gas.  One minute the politician is attempting some lofty rhetoric in the House of Commons, and an hour later she is addressing some beleaguered people in a homeless shelter.  Constant adaption has become an occupational hazard.Things were easier when great swaths of voters remained loyal to particular political parties.  Those days are gone, and with them the ability to put out a traditional message that gathers the troops.  Voters today frequently have entire menus of items that they care about that often blur the lines between party policies.  Navigating through such wants while, at the same time, retaining ongoing support can be a tricky thing.That's especially true for those seeking leadership.  Traditionally, voters have appreciated their leaders when they displayed a positive bent, but if recent elections are anything to go by an increasing number of voters are going for those angry voices that call for change.  Discerning this not so subtle change, modern leadership aspirants are taking extreme positions that previously might have proved destabilizing and unacceptable.The success of Donald Trump has prompted leadership contenders like Kellie Leitch to brandish harsher policies, believing they can carve out enough of the electorate to find a path to victory.  Yet many who knew her previously have been surprised at the severity of some of her positions, especially on immigration – as they were with her “snitch line” announcement in the last election.  But Leitch isn't trying to be consistent; she's shape-shifting in her reach for the crown.  She's hoping that by employing Donald Trump's tactics she can summon the same kind of groundswell that occurred south of the border.That Leitch remains silent while her campaign manager, Nick Kouvalis, blatantly publicizes his willingness to use “fake news” to support her campaign hardly squares with her principled demeanour evidenced in her pre-political professional life.  As Maclean's writer Martin Patriquin put it this past week:  “Kouvalis has a history of posting provocative, absurd and often completely false information.  He does so, he says, 'to make the left go nuts.' “  It is a troubling admission revealing that politics runs the danger of not only promoting shape-shifting personalities, but of debasing facts in the process.It can be tempting to see such practices as a partisan issue, but these behaviours frequently move across party lines as political ambition squeezes the integrity out of the democratic process.  It says something that we, as citizens, are perceived as gullible enough to accept such designed manipulations.  As Donald Trump's inauguration reminds us this week, if voters no longer know what they're getting, trust in democracy itself becomes the ultimate loser.Glen Pearson was a career professional firefighter and is a former Member of Parliament from southwestern Ontario.  He and his wife adopted three children from South Sudan and reside in London, Ontario.  He has been the co-director of the London Food Bank for 29 years.  He writes regularly for the London Free Press and also shares his views on a blog entitled “The Parallel Parliament“.   Follow him on twitter @GlenPearson.