Humans aren't perfect; that's what makes us humans. We often say one thing but do another. Despite this, we're still creatures of habit, and we often seek to find as many patterns as we can and grasp on to them tightly. However, when it comes to politics, the only pattern that we often see is that of politicians changing their minds.
One would think that pattern-seeking individuals would never elect politicians who are quick to change their minds. Voters say they want leaders who are principled and consistent. However, the current frontrunners for the Republican and Democratic nominations are consistently flip-flopping.
Why and how are Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump leading the polls despite their inconsistencies?
Both of those questions can be answered with one response: They're changing their positions on policy to represent a larger number of the American people and win their votes, essentially trying to be populist.
Consistency doesn’t win votes. Catering to the American public and telling them what they want to hear does. It’s politics. As long as the general public supports candidates that flip-flop, candidates will continue to do so. Politicians may have their own direction in mind, but the American people are the oil to the machine, so to get into office, politicians need to win votes.
Now, isn't this still counter intuitive and defying the public's expectations of what they want in their elected officials? Don’t people want consistent politicians?
In short, yes. People supposedly want consistency, but it doesn’t seem to be salient when it comes time to vote. Taking a look at Clinton and Trump, we can see their inconsistency. The inconsistency that has apparently helped launch them to the top.
Clinton and Trump have both been inconsistent in their political views over the decade and a half. They've both furthered themselves politically by doing so, but in very different ways.
Trump appears to say whatever he wants, even if it refutes something he said the day before. His brand of changing positions is one that is chaotic and fast-paced. One of the biggest credited reasons as to why he has had so much success in the polls is that he says what people want to hear. Trump's image and attitude of being blunt and deliberate have taken precedent over what his political stances are.
He has changed his positions on abortion, health care, Clinton (oh isn't that fun), President Obama, and taxes. Meet the Press made a lovely video showcasing Trump's inconsistencies.
In true Trump form, he often denies his history of inconsistency on a myriad of issues, but the record simply doesn't add up. Trump seems to change his mind as often as the average person changes clothes - every day - but he remains as the Republican front runner.
Clinton, over time (especially in the last decade), has changed her views on several major political issues to further herself within the Democratic Party and to (hopefully) win the nomination. If you look at her stances from the 2008 campaign cycle and compare them to the current platform she is running on, you'll notice that she's changed her stance on several very large issues.
Clinton has changed her positions on immigration, gun rights, gay marriage, the Iraq War, and has wavered from her position with the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Chuck Todd of Meet the Press also questioned Clinton's flip-flopping over issues, asking if it was out of “out of political expediency.” She answered with the following:
"I don’t think it reflects how people who are thoughtful actually conduct their lives. I mean, if we don’t learn, if we don’t, you know, make decisions based on the best information we have available, well, you know, that’s regrettable. And what I’ve always tried to do is to say, 'OK, what is the best decision that I can think about making?'"
Clinton brings up a valid point about learning new information and adjusting policies accordingly. The problem is that voters still don't know exactly who they're getting when they elect someone who flips over the issues. Clinton supporters know what her current policy stances are, but they aren't the same ones that she ran on in the 2008 election. Isn't that concerning? Then you have Trump, whose stances are harder to find than Waldo.
Despite it all, despite all of the inconsistency, Clinton and Trump both continue to lead polls. In fact, it might not be despite the inconsistency that they are both leading, it might be because of the inconsistency. People just might not realize how much they like to hear their own ideas being reinforced, even by someone who didn’t always hold that belief.
The question people need to ask themselves is, do I want to hear something inconsistent candidates say that I agree with, or do I want to hear something consistent candidates say that I don't agree with?
