Obama ‘evolves,’ Romney ‘flip-flops’

Columbia Journalism Review ^ | May 9, 2012 | Brendan Nyhan

[Mozilla]

Are Barack Obama and Mitt Romney so different after all? Despite the media’s portrayal of Romney as a uniquely craven politician, the recent controversy over Obama’s views on gay marriage highlights the ways that both candidates—like nearly all politicians—have adjusted their positions over their careers for political reasons.

[snip]

Why have Obama and Romney’s “evolutions” been covered so differently? As Joshua Green of Bloomberg Businessweek noted on Twitter, the difference between the candidates is far less clear than the media coverage would suggest. In both cases, electoral incentives are the primary factor shaping the positions that candidates publicly profess. When those incentives change, so do their positions.

[snip]

In this case, Obama and Romney each adopted an initial set of positions that were helpful in seeking office given the constituencies to whom they were appealing—primary voters in a liberal state senate district (Obama) or general election voters in a Democratic state (Romney). As they ran for higher office, they changed and adapted those positions to better match the preferences of primary and general election voters at the state and national levels. The mismatch between Obama’s state senate district and the national electorate was quite severe, but he was protected by the fact that his position changes were mostly made under relatively little scrutiny during his freakishly easy campaign for the US Senate in 2004 and were considered old news by 2008. By contrast, Romney has been forced to revise his initially moderate positions under the hot lights of the 2008 and 2012 presidential primary campaigns, which caused him to develop a reputation as a flip-flopper with no “core.”

[Mozilla]

Both Obama and Romney Flip-Flop.

[dragonblustar]

Did the MSM call Larry Sinclair for a comment?

[skeeter]

Obama’s views on gay marriage highlights the ways that both candidates—like nearly all politicians—have adjusted their positions over their careers for political reasons.

Golly. Ya think?

[Dilbert San Diego]

But the difference is — If you flip flop in a liberal direction, then you are celebrated in the MSM. I can’t believe how much the media gushed over Obama and this homosexual marriage announcement.

On the other hand, if you change positions to be more conservative, or change positions on issues which are not near and dear to liberals, as homosexual marriage is, then you are vulnerable to flip flop charges.

Finally, if you have an R next to your name, you are most vulnerable to criticism. If you have a D next to your name, you are evolving on issues and taking principled stands on an issue. Those with an R after their name are political opportunists.

[Above My Pay Grade]

I agree that both have flip flopped, but in fairness to Hussein, while he has changed his positions on certain issues, he has always run, voted, governed and presented himself as fundamentally a Liberal. (He is actually a Socialist, of course).

Romney, always ran and governed as a left wing, Liberal, and only started claiming to support Conservative positions around 2007, when the GOP primaries were starting.

What bothers me more, is that Romney wants us to buy this radical conversion from Big Government, pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-illegal, pro-homosexual zealot, to conservative hero, while claiming he has never really changed.

People do sometimes change and if he admitted he was an idiot for holding those lefty positions, I might be fooled into buyng his “conversion”. But when he makes claims like “I was a severely, conservative governor” and “I always came down on the side of life”, it is 100% clear that he is a damned liar.

[skeeter]

True, the use of the term ‘evolve’ will never be used to describe a change in an attitude or position that does not compliment the liberal agenda.

[baddog 219]

[Chuzzlewit]

yep.. the word “evolve” suggests an improvement...

this whole affair has been sickening, just sickening in regards to the lap-dog media.

honestly, I’m ready to wash my hands of the whole g*d*mn business..I’ll vote in November to be sure, because I have to vote against the communist.

[SMARTY]

The homosexual ‘cause’ will not see any material gain under "O" ... it is only an issue he will drag into the light of day when his fund raising begins to lag. It's a classic 'bait and switch' maneuver.

It is the functioning blueprint for 'pandering'. Everyone in the world sees that for what it plainly IS!