That's a very loaded and negative way to portray a career politician, but more importantly it's also completely unsubstantiated -- how is this relevant to Vestager?
For instance, why do you use the word "pander" to describe her work? Pander means to "gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire, need, or habit or a person with such a desire, etc.)". I think that sort of language should be used carefully, and at the very least it should be substantiated in terms of how it relates to the person you're talking about.
I've followed Vestager's career for over 15 years, and I don't think your characterization of her work is accurate at all. You might be able to clarify why you describe her that way, and that seems to be necessary for a substantive discussion on this.
> I don't think it's any better than an American politician
There are great American politicians for sure, but one thing I would note here is that there are significant differences in public trust and corruption levels between the US and Denmark (where Vestager has spent the vast majority of her public life). There's a high level of accountability, public scrutiny and public interest in how politicians work, and corruption is very low [0].
I think this plays a role in terms of how "good" the politicians are "on average" in a country, and to what degree they can be trusted.
[0] Corruption is obviously hard to quantify, but one way to measure/approximate it is the Corruption Perceptions Index [0] where "Denmark is the least corrupt country in the world, ranking consistently high among international financial transparency", and the U.S. ranked 18th in 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index