Political flip flopping just reving up

thrustbucket

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
I found this article interesting and thought it might spawn some interesting conversation. I've recently noticed this more and more, especially now that the candidates are chosen. It's really funny to watch each of them back peddle on issues and dance around issues that are polarizing.

For one thing, I think it's interesting that both candidates feel they now have to turn to the right, in varying degrees. This trend is interesting; of totally ignoring and often pissing off Right Leaning America until the final stretch, then they become the battleground.

The Candidates practise their U-Turns

The contenders in this year's US presidential election are no exceptions - both John McCain and Barack Obama have engaged in some nifty repositioning.

Mr McCain's U-turns have mostly increased his appeal to the Republican Party's base, placing him on a rightward trajectory.

Barack Obama has been performing a more traditional manoeuvre: running to the left during the primaries, when party activists need to be wooed, then shifting to the centre once the nomination is clinched.

Flip-flopping politicians will always attract charges of hypocrisy and opportunism: it may be worth it if it helps them win over undecided voters in the middle, but when the goal is to shore up their political base, the benefits are much less clear.

Here are some examples.

JOHN MCCAIN

Having long been a member of his party's more moderate wing on a number of issues, Mr McCain began adopting more right-wing positions during the primary campaign.

Immigration

Last year, Mr McCain was one of the key backers of President Bush's plan for "comprehensive immigration reform", which would have created "paths to citizenship" for illegal immigrants, while investing more money in border security.

The plan was very unpopular with the Republican rank-and-file, and Senate Republicans succeeded in blocking the scheme.

During the primaries, Mr McCain announced that his immigration focus would be on securing America's borders, rather than on giving illegal immigrants the chance to become US citizens.

"I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift," McCain told reporters in November 2007.

"I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people's priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders."

Christian right

Another McCain, quote, shift was in his relationship with the religious right of his party.

During his 2000 bid for the Republican nomination, relations between Mr McCain and Christian Coalition founder Jerry Falwell were notoriously fractious.

The Arizona senator memorably described Mr Falwell and fellow members of the religious right as "agents of intolerance".

But in 2006, ahead of his second presidential run, Mr McCain delivered the commencement address at Mr Falwell's Liberty University, after which he attended a small private party hosted by his former political adversary.

Interrogation rules


More recently, Mr McCain angered his former allies in the political centre by supporting a bill exempting the CIA from following the same rules on interrogation as the US Army.

Guantanamo

Mr McCain was one of the most prominent Republican voices opposed to the Bush administration's detention policy in Guantanamo Bay.

But when the Supreme Court recently ruled that Guantanamo detainees should have access to US courts, Mr McCain described it as "one of the worst decisions in the history of the country".

Oil drilling

Since sewing up the Republican nomination in March, Mr McCain - one of only a few prominent Republicans to accept the argument that human activity is causing climate change - has dropped his previous objection to lifting the ban on oil exploration off the coast of the US.

BARACK OBAMA

Since clinching the Democratic nomination, Barack Obama has also been making headlines for his policy shifts.

Campaign finance

Last month he announced that he would be rejecting public financing for his campaign, and would instead rely on private donations.

The McCain camp accused Mr Obama of "going back on his word", although Mr Obama insisted that he had never made a promise to stay in the public finance system.

Surveillance programme


Mr Obama also raised eyebrows when he announced that he would not be opposing a bill going through Congress giving immunity to telephone companies involved in the Bush administration's controversial warrantless wiretap programme.

His decision angered many of his supporters on the left, who accused him of going back on his 2007 pledge "to support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies".

Gun control

When the Supreme Court decided to overturn Washington DC's handgun ban, Mr Obama declared that the ruling "provide[d] much-needed guidance", despite having previously argued (in a written answer that he says was drafted by an aide and which he had not approved) that the ban was constitutional.

Iraq

Withdrawing troops from Iraq has long been one of the central planks of Mr Obama's campaign, and was something that set him apart from other Democratic candidates running for the party's presidential nomination.

Since his campaign began, however, conditions in Iraq have changed, violence has reduced, and some commentators have suggested that Mr Obama's position is out of date.

Mr Obama himself has announced that he plans to visit Iraq, where he will make "a thorough assessment" which could lead him to "refine" his policy.

Some critics have seized on this as an indication that Mr Obama is laying the groundwork for a change in position.

Free trade

Mr Obama recently hinted to Fortune magazine that his strong anti-free trade rhetoric during the primaries may not be reflected in his actual trade policy should he become president.

His remarks are a neat summation of the pressures and temptations that lead politicians to shift their positions during the process of running for office.

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he said.

"Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you understood the majority of the Republican Party, you'd understand why he's doing what he's doing. The base hates him with passion.
 
I never understood the whole attack on this. Isn't flexible thought a hallmark of leadership, not rigid positions unwavering with changing circumstances?
 
It's a "what's he gonna say next?" sort of thing. Does whatever he can to get your vote, blah blah blah, etc.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']It's a "what's he gonna say next?" sort of thing. Does whatever he can to get your vote, blah blah blah, etc.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. It's just pandering at it's finest.

Politicians use to run on and get elected on PROMISES. But that hasn't really been the case for quite some time. Now they just tell us what they think we want to hear at the time to get a vote.

They are now adept at trying to explain why they changed their minds on the issues you voted for them for.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Exactly. It's just pandering at it's finest.

Politicians use to run on and get elected on PROMISES. But that hasn't really been the case for quite some time. Now they just tell us what they think we want to hear at the time to get a vote.

They are now adept at trying to explain why they changed their minds on the issues you voted for them for.[/quote]

And this time you have 2 different styles of that. One being the crafty veteran and the other being a young upstart. None of what they try to deliver will be new, but their styles of presenting it are vastly different.
 
I can assure you that regardless of who is elected the next President, if they EVER utter the words "Stay the Course" in a public speech, the public at large is going to shit a brick.

This might be the only election ever where "flip-flopping" might actually be considered flexibility. But the public itself needs to calm down, a person taking a different path to reach the same goal is NOT a bad thing.

"Sire! The path is flooded, we cannot pass!"
"We must! I vowed to the people that I shall cross this path to victory!"
"But Sire! There's a perfectly good path a little ways down, I horses shall not drown there."
"Nonsense! I must keep my word to the people, THIS is the path I shall cross."

You can make the "glub glub" drowning sound effects yourself.

~HotShotX
 
I was chatting with a friend who went on a cruise to Alaska for a few weeks.

He's an old hippie/liberal, so you know where he lies politically (we had a round of shots to celebrate the death of Jesse Helms over the weekend, FWIW).

He said that he'd been opposed to the Alaskan oil pipeline his whole life, thinking it was visually obstructive, hazardous to the environment, and hazardous to the animal populations in the environment.

He got to visit, he came back informed, he saw the pipelines, saw the land around it, learned of the steep fines oil companies pay if they stray from the access roads on the pipelines, learned of the job growth it promoted, saw animals leaning on the pipes to get a little warmth in the cold climate, and said that he'd changed his mind.

I slammed down my beverage, declared him a flip-flopper, and wrote any future opinion he has off for now and forever.

;)

:roll:

Y'all kids don't seem to understand the way the world works. Flip-flopping is a time and education-sensitive issue.

Telling the NRA you'll make sure they can buy RPGs or whatever bullshit they want, then leaving that rally to go to a luncheon where you say you'll look into tightening gun legislation - THAT is flip-flopping, or pandering.

Changing your stance as conditions change over time? That, my friends, is NOT flip-flopping. After 8 years of thick-skulled dimwits ramming their head into the wall over and over again, insisting that there is indeed a door there, I can deal with people whose opinions change with the times. Not always, of course.

But save the reactionary pro-wrestling bullshit for another day, and then think before you type. Christ.

Wile E. Coyote was not a flip-flopper.
 
[quote name='Mike23']I never understood the whole attack on this. Isn't flexible thought a hallmark of leadership, not rigid positions unwavering with changing circumstances?[/quote]


I agree. I think the problem people have is that those change in positions often is done for personal gain more than an analysis of a situation.
 
My view of the current candidates and American Politicians in general:

Walk into a car lot.
Buy a car.
Drive 1/2 a mile and hit a small bump and a tire immediately deflates.
Drive the car back to the car dealer.
The salesman says "Defective?! No, you need to understand, that car simply "adapted" to the road.


[quote name='mykevermin']Changing your stance as conditions change over time? That, my friends, is NOT flip-flopping. After 8 years of thick-skulled dimwits ramming their head into the wall over and over again, insisting that they can install a door, but it's taken far longer than installing doors should, since installing glass doors while wearing boxing gloves is quite a challenge. They continue to insist on wearing the boxing gloves as well as insist on installing a glass door - and are currently attempting to get the hinges in place. Meanwhile, most wonder why you'd attempt such a long drawn out expensive pain in the ass for just a damn door. there is indeed a door there, I can deal with people whose opinions change with the times. Not always, of course.[/quote]

I appreciate that analogy, and agree with it, with a couple fixes.

But ultimately, and perhaps unfortunately, we all like flip flopping, when the flopping is done in a direction we like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i just read this, before coming here, i thought it was interesting, but fully expected. the list will no doubt double by november.
 
bread's done
Back
Top