Practically Speaking

Though they seem to do little to change anyones mind in the US, i too am greatly looking forward to the debates. I think McCain has Obama beat in the flip flops on important issues, but it depends greatly on who is keeping count.

I would also argue that Bush's main fault is his inability to change his mind when newer and better data contradicts his desires or beliefs. It does appear that Bush can change his mind when faced with overwhelming and solid data and 'flip flop', it just takes 6-7 years.

Kyle's reply: You are so right when you say, it depends on who is keeping count.

I think there is a difference between changing position because of different circumstances or discovering new data though. McCain on domestic drilling would be an example of that. He formerly was against--especially back in the days when oil was cheap. Now he is for--yes, because of public pressure, but also because the price has risen so rapidly. The circumstances have changed.

McCain on immigration would be a flip-flop based on public pressure. 

Obama's flip flops are different. He attends a radical church for 20 years and defends his pastor when people start raising an eyebrow. Now he has distanced himself from the church and pastor because the heat is on. Even Dianne Sawyer questioned him on his Iraq stance.

We all change some of our opinions on some things over the years. I have grown more conservative since my college days. 

The problem is a lot of uneducated voters will vote for Obama because he is young and black.  Hopefully the educated voters can win out or it will be a long and scary 4 years.

Hi Kyle,

That is what I meant by the flip flops, or changes in opinion on certain issues being different between the two candidates.

I believe every person and presidential candidate has a right to change his or her mind.

The change in church is a very personal thing, and Obama did not do it when someone starting raising an eyebrow. The church he was a part of was not much more 'radical' than most churches, but the church leader really took advantage of his new status when a member became a presidential candidate. If your pastor starting saying the things the leader of his church did or became extremely radically conservative in a manner you did not agree with, would you consider a change?

'Flip flopping' on a personal issue is different from changing opinion completely on issues that actually matter to the taxpayer, to the manner the government functions. McCain should have known gas prices would rise, and as such, pressure to find more oil sources will grow continually, this will be the case for the next 50 years and more, and has been the case for decades. The oil that is still waiting to be pumped offshores and in Alaska will be even more critical in 40-50 years than it is now or 10 years from now. It will all be pumped eventually, it is just a matter of when the supply forces us into it. I would prefer to bank it until its value is even higher, and it will go up. Still, i think he has a right to change his mind, he thinks this is the time to lease out more of our oceans to oil companies, that is his right (I am sure you agree). But Obama doesn't have a right to change his mind or opinion? I think they both have a right to change their mind on issues.  Giving in to public pressure actually appears to be a good reason to me for changing, isn't that the way the system is supposed to work, with our elected leaders following the will of the people?  We can't vote directly on these issues, but shouldn't the politicians be thinking a bit about what the public says and wants? They shouldn't follow every poll and jump ship on every issue of course, but when greater than 60% of public strongly favors something, maybe it is time to reconsider.

I think the whole 'flip flop' issue should drop because it is fluff and the media should research and present the views, values, and ideals of each candidate and not dwell on these issues. Keep the stories of McCain's wife stealing a cookie recipe, or Michelle Obama standing to the right or left (literally not politically), or how they display their affections to their spouse out of the news and out of debates.

PK1FN, are those the same uneducated voters that voted for Bush in the last couple of rounds? Should we set a bar of intelligence for voting? Democracy depends on a educated citizenry, via Thomas Jefferson. Maybe we could just disallow people from voting who choose their preference based on only one or two issues. If someone says they are voting for someone based on that person being young and black, no vote. Also, if someone says they are voting for someone based on that person being old and white, no vote.

I do remember polls showing that among the most intelligent demographics, Obama has very high numbers. I too hope the educated voters win out!

Kyle's reply: Oh, I think I have just been insulted! :) I don't agree with all, but thanks for reading.

Hi Kyle,

Sorry, i didn't mean to insult you at all. Now, if your vote counted for 50% of the electorate, maybe... Certainly there are many very intelligent people cheering for McCain, but polling demographics in the primaries clearly showed in the white upper class college educated demographic, Obama was ahead.

It was actually Packfan that i was responding to at the end, when he or she implied that Obama would win based on all us 'unedcuated' people voting for him that only care about his age and race, and not the issues or any other factor.

I know we are on different sides politically, but i am sure you are well educated and intelligent, and work hard at promoting and explaining your side of the issues.

Kyle's reply: You did that rather nicely. I think it is difficult to base the November vote on who voted for a candidate in the primary. There was a lot of crossover on both sides. (I voted for Clinton!) 

Oh, i completely agree with your latest reply. I would never base the results of November on any issue or polls in April.

I even agree with PkFn to an extent and his pessimism, I think the election will be won or lost by one candidate as much based on some issue that comes up sometime in early fall. One candidate will make a mistake and mention something that isn't factually correct and the news will be all over it, and that will tip the vote. Like i said before, let's bring on the debates and hopefully they will be good ones full of important substance and not heresay, rumors, and fluff issues that somehow become pervasive.

What do the candidates think of the Big Brett Favre situation, that is the issue most important to Wisconsin voters... ;)