Sounds like what a politician would say to get some more votes from the "I'm afraid and have no idea what encryption is" crowd, without actually having to do anything after the election.

That quote is substantially different from being against encryption. I mean, I'm not enthusiastic about his stance, but it's simply not what you're claiming.

You might be right however it's a slippery slope that we and I would hope the informed internet community must give no quarter. It's clear the nation state is an archaic institution that is slowly on it's way out. Naturally we cannot accept the authority of the nation state forever and giving such immense and misplaced power to such an actor (or any actor for that matter) will have seriously dire consequences. The end result will be the same however it may take us 10 or 20 extra, bloody, years to get there.

I'm not convinced hyperbole and statements -- like your original one -- that are substantially misleading are any way for intelligent people to make points.

Do these politicians know something we don't? Why do they have this seemingly counterproductive viewpoint?

Incompetence.

Or nefarious goals. If you can spy on the opposition, or popular movements, that's good for you when you are in power.

Or they do know things, and we're the ones in the wrong.

Or simply, security theater.