|
I could totally see Clinton accidentally losing to her own false flag candidate.
|
#
¿
May 4, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
Basically every major president ever has made major pivots on foreign policy. Woodrow Wilson ran on the promise to keep America out of the First World War. Franklin Delano Roosevelt campaigned on the promise to keep America out of the Second World War. Johnson ran against Goldwater in 1964 by presenting him as a dangerous war mongering extremist but as soon as Johnson had won he began to escalate America's military involvement in Vietnam. Nixon pivoted on China, Reagan reversed his early stance about the USSR and ended up negotiating several arms treaties, George W. Bush specifically condemned "nation building" efforts during the 2000 campaign but then attempted his own nation building experiments in the Middle East. Of course there are domestic policy examples as well. Obama campaigned against Hilary Clinton's healthcare plan but ended up implementing a plan that was very similar, including specific provisions he'd opposed such as the mandate to buy insurance. He also he would renegotiate NAFTA and not only did he not do that but his administration has been pushing for the TPP, which is basically NAFTA on steroids, etc.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Well done, you've managed to spend two paragraphs without even reading the drat question. Actually most of the examples I cited occurred before the modern primary system was implemented. I don't know why you'd make such a sweeping and confident statement about a subject you don't seem particularly knowledgeable on. But either way, to answer your original question, Romney switched positions on immigration following the primary. Party insiders are very candid about the fact that candidates shift positions between the primary and the general election. Some of that is just a matter of emphasis but in some cases it also means changing specific policy positions. I guess you could debate whether this "worked" for Romney since he still lost but I'm sure if you were asked your question to the Academy of Political Science rather than The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion: You Are Racist > Molten Salt Reactor > then you'd get plenty of other examples, especially on dumb local issues that aren't memorable enough for somebody to recall 10 years later. Helsing has issued a correction as of 06:19 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:How are you all so very very bad at this?  This has got to be the most prototypically goony reply ever. The modern primary system hasn't been around long enough to give us a meaningful sample size and it's impossible to isolate and test for whether a flip flop caused a politician to lose. Your defining the question in a way that makes literally no sense and then getting really huffy and upset that other people aren't answering in the highly specific and narrow way that you want. Usually politicians "pivot" by changing the issues they emphasize rather than literally changing the wording of their position (though this happens as well and you've been given examples of it). The fact you have an autistic understanding of politics is really your problem, not anyone else's.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2016 19:51
|
|