Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently

Effective politicians are those which works for public welfare and development. So, I am more inclined to first view of political leaders giving importance to public opinion.

It is always necessary to take public opinion into account. It is a responsibility and duty of an politician to resolve public grievance. His principles and objectives may not align with the public opinion but people vote them with the hope that she/he will represent them at all levels, take up their issues and resolve it. Distrust politician cannot survive for longer duration.

One of the suited example is well known Indian actor, Govinda. When he was at apogee of his Bollywood career, he entered in politics citing advantage of his fame. He contested national elections from south Mumbai, well known for mediocre living and got elected with thumping victory. He had his own vision and objectives; setting up Industries, tax exemption to business, etc. But expectation of public was as simple as food, clothing and shelter. He changed policies so that entrepreneur can set up business in his area, property rate sky rocketed because of this and common man couldn't afford a house. His policies and objectives were contrary to public expectation. There was no improvement in common mans life, still they have to face severe water scarcity, rationing and illiteracy. People somehow survived 5 years but next national elections gave their verdict, FAIL! He lost election even more convincingly than he won.

It is always necessary for a politician to maintain balance between public expectation and their principles. There are few breeds of politicians who are committed to their principles and can go against public opinion. But sometimes it may go wrong and are denigrated for their decisions. Example I would like to give is Arvind Kejriwal, who bought back Gandhiji's ideology of Satyagraha and hunger strike. He initiated movement against corruption and entire India supported his ideology. It was a revolution in India. Movement got a great momentum, even Indians from US were funding Aravind Kejriwal's party. With this ideology he contested Delhi election and forming a coalition government with the support of other party. Within few week he proposed a anti-corruption bill in legislation. Majority in assembly were against this bill and fearing failure he not only revoked the bill but also resigned as a Chief Minister of Delhi. People of Delhi were disgruntled by his decision, as anti-corruption was not only problem Delhites were facing. He lost all his supporter and followers and now he is back to where he started.

Citing above reasons, I think political leaders should work in conjunction with public and may need to compromise on their principles.