The matches are:
- projecting an image of being one of the common people = PLAIN FOLKS
- using well-known personalities in the hopes of identifying with some of their glamour = TESTIMONIALS
- giving the impression that everyone is involved, if you're not, you're missing out = BANDWAGON
- the candidate recalls all the good things done, omitting facts that would justify his defeat = CARD STACKING
- using wide-spread universal terms that do not deal with the specific issues at hand = GLITTERING GENERALITIES
- using broad accusations and negative attacks in order to bring down the reputation of an opponent = NAME CALLING
Allow me to say a bit more about the "glittering generalities" type of propaganda, giving a couple examples.
As defined by Richard Nordquist, writing for ThoughtCo, "A glittering generality is a vague word or phrase used to evoke positive feelings rather than to convey information."
If a political candidate promises, "I will promote growth that will bring us into the 21st century," or says that she is the one who will bring "peace, prosperity, and progress," those are all vague, hopeful-sounding terms -- but there is no explanation of how exactly the candidate will work to achieve those goals.
Offering glittering generalities is not wrong, but if there are no concrete action plans or details provided, then the phrases are only propaganda.
