Hillary Clinton is popular among voters as a person who shifts her view on a number of issues: gay marriage, the Iraq War, the keystone pipeline, and multiple trade deals. Clinton currently opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership yet when she was Secretary of State under the Obama Administration, she “praised the Trans-Pacific Partnership as a deal that ‘sets the gold standard in trade agreements.” At the Presidential debate, Trump accused her of flip-flopping only after he spoke out against the trade deal. Clinton has carefully acknowledged the subject by revealing she at one point agreed with the trade deal, but after closer reconsideration she stated, “it didn’t meet my standards.” When she was discussing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, she never bashed President Obama, but simply stated that, “it didn’t meet her standards.” This is a very calculated statement because instead of looking like an inconsistent flip flopper, she appears more attentive and thorough in regards to trade deals, when, in reality, she changed positions when she realized the deal was not popular among voters. Although Clinton may have a history of flip flopping positions, every time she shifts her opinion, she does so in a very calculated and articulate way.
Flip Flopping Record
That was not the first Hillary Clinton has switched her position on a trade deal. In 1993, Clinton praised her husband when he signed NAFTA into law, but during her 2008 presidential campaign, she referred to the deal as a “mistake.” However, instead of abruptly moving from one side to another, she cautiously tip toes her way from one opinion to another. For example, instead of outright calling NAFTA one of the worst trade deals our country has every made, she carefully states, “It did not deliver on what we had hoped it would.” Unlike her opponent, she never makes a decision without carefully calculating what and how she will communicate.
I understand that opinions on issues change as the rhetorical situation surrounding the issue changes, but I think that someone like Clinton, who has had 30 years of political experience, should have been smarter and more proactive throughout her career as a politician. It is less surprising when Trump ‘flip flops’ his rhetoric and is more sketchy when Clinton does because she is viewed as a politician whereas Trump is not.
I could not agree more with Rachel’s comment above. We are not as surprised when Trump flip flops on positions. We have seen this happen on many occasions one being his issue on trade. His use of dissociation was evident when he started back tracking say not all immigrants had to be booted out and they were not all bad anymore. We go on to see that Clinton has changed sides on many issues but most importantly the Trans-Pcific Partnership. It has been mentioned she was in office when this policy was brought up and she sided with it, now all of a sudden she doesn’t. Why do we see a sudden shift in her stance when she had a hand in creating the partnership. After being in politics for so long Clinton should either be all in or all out when it comes to major issues like these. We do not need a President who can’t make up their mind. Although Trump can’t seem to make his up either he hasn’t had lifelong experience within the political arena. It seems that people tend to rely on Hilary for all of her experience but then at times we wonder where she has been all of these years because it certainly doesn’t seem as if she’s made many of the changes she promised to make or gained very much knowledge from all of this “experience.”
This is interesting. I have never thought of flip-flopping as a ‘good’ thing. I suppose it is true that you can gain more followers by being more neutral or rather, switching sides every now and then. I also agree that one of Clinton’s strengths is caution and the way she phrases her words. Choosing her words carefully has defiantly helped with her reputation.