Does it matter to you if a candidate "flip-flops" on issues?

Question

How about if they tell one group (like the NAACP) one thing, while telling another group (UAW) something completely different?

Answer 1

It absolutely matters. I mean, if you can't trust them to even say the same thing twice, how can you trust them to DO what they say?

I think Romney is the worst, this time around. I think he's taken two positions on virtually every issue: for and against gun control, for and against gay marriage, for and against socialized medicine, for and against abortion, for and against....well, you get the picture.

I'm voting for Ron Paul, partly because he hasn't changed his positions even on things that may not be popular. I mean, you have to respect someone who stands up for his convictions. He's running as an anti-war candidate in the Republican primary...now THAT takes guts!

Answer 2

That would be pandering, not really flip-flopping. Pandering is bad. It's when you say one thing to one group and another thing to another group so that both groups will like you. Flip flopping is taking one position on an issue and then changing it without careful consideration.

Being able to change your mind have new thoughts and opinions is an important thing for a politician, and sometimes it's hard to tell when a politician has flip-flopped or made a new decision that is good and warranted.

So, flip-flopping is bad. But sometimes people are accused of flip-flopping when they actually have not.

Answer 3

Consistency on major issues is vital if presidential candidates are to be taken seriously and win elections.

Some candidates try to be all things to all people.

They are briefed on poll numbers, and cater to certain groups.

People judge candidates on many different things.

They should judge them most on their ability to bring diverse groups together for the sake of solving issues and preventing conflicts (not only in America, but the entire world).

Americans don't understand the necessity of electing candidates who will appeal to the rest of the world as well.

Electing the wrong person will make life less and less bearable, although people will hardly notice.

"Flip flopping" could be a sign that the candidate will fail the test for international relations.

Answer 4

I think that flip-flopping is a pretty useless term for the most part. There are true flip-floppers, like Romney for instance. Changing your entire moral stance on abortion, gays and guns in the space of a few months to become viable to the GOP is flip-flopping of such proportions that a man like that just can't be trusted.

But when the term flip-flopping is applied to someone who sees a situation isn't working and has the stones to say so and change their stance on it - then it is something to be admired. I think that politicians who can't change course or change their minds as they receive new information are not only useless, but dangerous to our country. We've seen what "stay the course no matter what" has gotten us in Iraq.

Answer 5

I advise that the top cut back for contributions be carried out away with, and that the optimal payouts in retirement nonetheless proceed to be as they are, adjusted for inflation. Social secure practices isn't a "supply away" application yet one that all of us make contributions to love a chit expenses plan, and could be shielded from different makes use of via the government. Do you compromise or disagree and why? in case you're so stressful approximately it then why do not you; first positioned it back into the deepest sector and make to have been no can take out funds from it for their very own interest, 2nd pay back each penny you have borrowed from the two Social secure practices and Medicare, third take the unlawful immigrants off of it and people who come over here yet by no capacity paid a penny to it, and finally have it a similar for each individual; in different words government officers are to take section in it and in the event that they want something extra they do it on their very own with out the tax payers investment it?yet, the economic stytem feeding the imbalances had by no capacity been incredibly replaced. They, a team of pupils, stated that each and each person expenses of interest could be 3% or much less for each individual to alter into wealthy if needed (that is real additionally to taces). the proper economic concern could be, they stated, while there have been no expenses of interest. Why not attempt this answer? the wealthy could nonetheless be wealthy. My question is: while soial secure practices will become a project related to federal money owed, why not paintings with a balanced or earnings funds and spend no extra advantageous than is equipped in, as any kinfolk has to try for? Why not ban all loobying presents with the intention to get rules that serve the country? God bless united states of america of america.

Answer 6

It does matter. If he flip flops it's because he's only interested in getting elected. He doesn't really care about the issues. Most politicians only concern themselves with what's important to them not to us. It's a good thing we are protected by a constitution. Many of us would be disappearing in the middle of the night never to be seen again.

Answer 7

My answer was going to be.....One's stand on a particular issue should not be changed unless new information is provided that would support that change. Other than that a prepared Candidate should have already made a decision on the issues, before deciding to run for Office.

But per Your example.....Yes it matters, Yes it is wrong....and it is two faced.

However.....Sadly.... that may be Basic 101 in Political Teachings....

Answer 8

depends on the situation. every politician evolves as a person and often changes their views on an issue. if the flip-flop is over a 10-15 year period, that is one thing. if a candidate says one thing, then 2 years later says another because the issue they previously supported is no longer popular...that is very bad and shows a lot about their moral character. i dont agree with everything john mccain stands for, but he is hardcore about the war in iraq, as is joe lieberman. i think they both have guts to stand up for what they believe in

Answer 9

Depends. Usually, yes, because it shows they will do anything to get elected and one has no idea what they really believe and will do once elected. Sometimes, though, more facts come out and a person just changes their mind but this seems to be quite rare in politics. In the case you've pointed out, it also shows stupidity - not a good thing for a supposed leader.

Answer 10

Politicians lie, they talk out of both sides of their mouth at the same time to get votes. I don't like it and demand accountability. Most voters do not. My point of view is drowned out by the masses of unthinking Bush-haters who will accept anything to get a Democrat in office. Unfortunately, we will all get something we don't want if they get their way in 08.

I point out the Dems because I am Black. They support so many things Blacks are against yet Blacks vote for them anyway.

Examples? Large numbers of Blacks have always fought in every war even when we weren't permitted, weren't citizens or even trained. yet the Democratic leadership hates the military and constantly insults our proud service. Blacks are <13% of the population but 38% of the military, 3X our numbers.