Is Political Arrogance dragging Europe to the Right?

[Husar]

My point is that their job is to a great extent to work for the party (line), whether they work hard or not.

If you have politicians that are bucking the party line, that may not be ideal if their knowledge of the party ideology was what that allowed them to rise in the ranks in the first place (i.e. that's the skill they have been evaluated for; maybe their gut feeling as independent individuals is horrible).

A more ideal reality may be one where the politicians who both know the party ideology the best as well as the most probable consequences of as many relatively common policies as possible in a wide range of scenarios rise to the highest ranks; and where political parties would advertise to potential voters the society that they could realistically achieve given the principles of their ideology and current realities, as well as the compromises they would be willing or not willing to make in these scenarios.

There should somehow be a much larger focus on to what degree the politicians seem capable of understanding cause and effect in the world. Someone who doesn't understand relevant cause and effect would be less likely to deliver on their promises, whatever they may be.

What Pannonian said. And also consider that it is not black and white because cause and effect in a system that includes millions of humans are not always very clear. If we could definitely prove that one party is right and all the others are wrong, there'd be no need for democracy. Of course there are also different interests that different parties and politicians try to work for. If curbing some corporate freedoms is good for the country but some of the corporate owners also own newspapers, you can guess what happens. Suddenly you have "two opinions" in the country.
And then you have people who complain about legislation they don't even seem to fully understand. Like the ban on advertising that drinking lots of water makes you healthier or so, which looked stupid on a superficial look but actually made sense as the ad was highly misleading to make more profit.

a mere preference for the status quo

That's a euphemism for fear of change.

Whatever the explanation for the robbery pattern would be is beside the point here, which is that it can be very difficult for ordinary people to know based on everyday experience e.g. whether something has improved, gotten worse or largely stayed the same (a very slow and gradual change may also be difficult to notice).

Eh, yes, and? That justifies taking to the streets to demonstrate against the islamization of the occident, which is not really happening, or to vote for a party that declares homosexuality a mental illness? Your argument is besides my point that some people are merely idiots who don't think but put a lot of effort into voicing their badly-thought-out ideas. If there is an increase in crime rates that noone really notices, then maybe the entire rhetoric of the end of the western world as we know it is also incredibly stupid?
The other question is why do you seemingly argue that you trust the majhority of AfD voters to have made a sensible choice and at the same time you seem to argue that the people who don't vote for them are not sensible enough to notice the crime increase? So basically the effect of a policy is easier to see from afar than if you're actually affected by it? Are you making an argument that all voting laws should be changed so that only people from neighboring countries can vote and citizens can't?