# Is a charge of "waffling" ever honest? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 16, 2007, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508 "2007-02-16T17:40:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![According\_to\_Pliny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@According\_to\_Pliny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/According_to_Pliny)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/1 "2007-02-16T17:40:49Z")
Some pols like to charge others with waffling when they have a change of heart. Or even when they they vote differently on a bill that at first won’t get a majority, goes into conference and gets modified, and then passes. I.e., the votes were on different versions. Yet these same pols won’t see something like Mitch Romney’s reversals as waffling. Just seeing the light. Is the term itself an indication of a smear tactic? Is it fair to fault the person who says it as automatically disingenuous? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/2 "2007-02-16T17:53:41Z")
In the abstract, waffling can be a fair charge. It should refer to a change of positions undertaken for political advantage rather than a genuine change in outlook. Unfortunately, when a change of position does confer political benefit, it’s hard to prove that the change arose from more admirable motives. As a somewhat related example: I think it’s very possible for people of good faith to disagree on whether President Clinton should have been impeached. But I’m willing to bet that the Democrats that voted to impeach him, and the Republicans who voted NOT to impeach him, were acting in good faith with their respective positions. A Democrat that voted not to impeach, or a Republican that voted to impeach, may well have also been acting in good faith… or may have simply been acting for the benefit of their political party. It’s hard to tell. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/3 "2007-02-16T18:20:18Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m willing to bet that the Democrats that voted to impeach him, and the Republicans who voted NOT to impeach him, were acting in good faith with their respective positions. Why? That seems like a pretty silly assumption. It’s not like there aren’t many many political motives more complex than simply toeing the party line. Your argument could be used to claim that a Republican running in a very liberal district is always acting out of pure conscience when they break with their party. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/4 "2007-02-16T18:44:43Z")
[QUOTE=According to Pliny] Is the term itself an indication of a smear tactic? [/QUOTE] I think so, yes. There are people whose jobs are to mine the opponents’ histories for ways to make them look bad. These ways include, but are not limited to, spinning an interpretation of things they’ve said. Waffling is one of the easiest things to spin. At the same time, there are people whose jobs are to put out fires. It’s easier to start a fire than to put one out, so your firefighters have to be damn good. It takes more than just denial. A headline that says “Smith denies smearing Jews” just won’t cut it. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/5 "2007-02-16T19:22:14Z")
A charge of waffling may be honest and appropriate, but far more often than not, it isn’t. I’d hope every public official would have the intellect and courage to admit when he or she was wrong on an earlier vote, and decide to vote differently the next time. But those who do automatically open themselves up to the W-word, and American politics being what they are these days, they can be virtually certain they’re going to hear it. It obscures more than it illuminates. “Only the dead never change their minds.” I forget who said that… ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/6 "2007-02-16T21:40:01Z")
[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir] “Only the dead never change their minds.” I forget who said that… [/QUOTE] “The foolish and the dead alone never change their opinions.” — James Russell Lowell ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/7 "2007-02-16T22:16:42Z")
Yet you can also damn a man by pointing out that he never changes his mind; who can forget Stephen Colbert at the [White House Correspondents Dinner](http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/30/1441/59811): > [@](#): > > The greatest thing about [President Bush] is he’s steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man’s beliefs never will. ---
**Author:** ![According\_to\_Pliny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@According\_to\_Pliny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/According_to_Pliny)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/8 "2007-02-16T22:19:49Z")
[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir] A charge of waffling may be honest and appropriate,…/QUOTE]This is what I find hard to imagine. First, the only way a person could be faulted for changing their opinion would be if it were bought. And second, I can’t imagine anyone saying the fault was the changing of opinion rather than the resulting opinion itself. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/9 "2007-02-16T22:28:19Z")
[QUOTE=Apos] Why? That seems like a pretty silly assumption. It’s not like there aren’t many many political motives more complex than simply toeing the party line. Your argument could be used to claim that a Republican running in a very liberal district is always acting out of pure conscience when they break with their party. [/QUOTE] Very true – what I said was more intended as an illustration of “good faith decision on the merits vs. bad faith decision on the poll numbers” than an in-depth analysis of the issue. But you’re quite right. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2007, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/10 "2007-02-16T22:49:35Z")
Politicians change their positions for political, non-principled reasons, and they change their positions because the truly believe a change is warranted–they’ve become smarter, or circumstances changed, or whatever. This seems axiomatic to me. Why wouldn’t this be true? How we individually assess each instance is a different matter, I suppose, but it doesn’t change the politician’s real motivation. It’s a complex world. Sometimes even the politician isn’t sure, I’ll bet. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/11 "2007-02-17T04:54:06Z")
[QUOTE=According to Pliny] …This is what I find hard to imagine. First, the only way a person could be faulted for changing their opinion would be if it were bought. And second, I can’t imagine anyone saying the fault was the changing of opinion rather than the resulting opinion itself. [/QUOTE] I disagree. “Waffling” may also be the result either of indecisiveness, political opportunism, lack of fixed principles or even overbearing/controlling advisors. Or any combination of these. If the charge is made, in good faith, on that basis - which I readily concede is hardly ever the case nowadays - then I think it may be “honest” as defined by the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/12 "2007-02-17T05:38:50Z")
I dunno. Maybe. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/13 "2007-02-17T13:52:24Z")
Keynes was good at that ‘When I find I’m wrong I change my mind, what do you do ?’ Almost impossible to cite as there are variations. ‘Waffling’ to my British vocabulary means speaking utter, indeciferable garbage’ eg: ‘Well there is something to be said for that point of view, and a lot to be said against it. If one could verify the veracitity of the assumptions, then one would need to review the situation.’ I could not resist last bit. Clinton should have answered ‘in my dreams - and do you ever have dreams about [insert male elderly senator]’ ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/14 "2007-02-17T15:29:14Z")
Changing your mind or changing your policies isn’t the same thing as waffling. The Senator who supported the Iraq War 4 years ago and opposes it now is not a waffler. The waffler is the person who has a stance or position but can’t seem to decide what to do about it… or who proposes a bold measure, and then backs doown almost immediately when there’s some opposition. Think of Bill Clinton on gays in the military. “I declare that gays should be accpeted throughout the military… oh, but some people don’t like that… um, well, let me retract my previous executive order and come up with a Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy that doesn’t satisfy anybody on either side.” Or Justice Anthony Kennedy on abortion. “Roe vs. Wade was a wrongheaded decision that deserves to be overturned on the merits… aw, but it’s such a divisive issue and it’s sort of been settled, and so… maybe I’ll just allow a little bit of restriction here and there without actually addressing the flaws of Roe… that way NOBODY on EITHER side is really happy with my decision.” ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-charge-of-waffling-ever-honest/392508/15 "2007-02-17T20:05:41Z")
See Gore, Al. When he moved from the House to the Senate, he made major adjustments to his policy positions in order to appeal to a different electorate. I’m their leader! Which way did they go?