Flip-flopper or 'agent of change'
Changing our mind is how we progress – it's a sign of strength, not weakness
Vancouver, Canada
Flip-flopping. A presidential candidate would almost rather be accused of strange foot tapping under a bathroom-stall door, than of daring to change their views.
By the way the term is slung about – look to Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton – it's clearly implied that the voting public should never trust a flopper.
The flip-flopper charge has no party allegiance; both sides toss it around. Almost no candidate escapes the label, and it's become as heinous an insult as it gets. But it's time to rethink the whole flip-flopper issue.
I change my mind all the time and don't consider this to be a character flaw. Some issues I've flip-flopped on include:
•The existence of the tooth fairy;
•Whether or not giant shoulder pads were a good fashion statement;
•Certainty that an early boyfriend was love of my life;
•Belief that Duran Duran is the great musical influence of our generation.
I'm distrustful of people who don't change their mind every now and again. If there were no flip-flopping, we might still be convinced that the earth was flat and that there wasn't a single illness that couldn't be made better by the liberal application of leeches.
Even though I'm no specialist in the area, the idea of NASA "staying the course" with a flat earth policy strikes me as a bad plan. On a personal level, I am very grateful medical science has flip-flopped on the leech issue. I'm glad I do not have to consider a strong leech-loyalty an attribute when choosing a healthcare provider.
In the face of new information we should be willing to ponder if what we think might, , be flawed. If a candidate's beliefs are too weak to stand up to scrutiny, then watch out: that's the problem candidates should worry about voters getting hip to, not that they've changed their minds.
