As Hrugaar pointed out, suspiciously different stances could imply either insanity, or (hopefully more likely) a susceptibility to the dollars and/or persuasion of special interest groups… which, while very much a part of US politics (sigh), seems to be something of a negative at the moment.

But all in all, as long as a politician is making rational decisions for well-articulated reasons, I couldn’t care how well they did or didn’t fit a pattern. What would be *really* impressive would be a politician who honestly admitted when they were wrong in the past, and changed their approach to ensure they didn’t keep making that mistake.

Of course, if you’re GWB, then everything you do is right, because JC told you to do it. Such certitude must be comforting (if horribly damaging in terms of the consequences to the rest of humanity).

Of course if someone changed their voting pattern in the past, then you can raise the question why they did so; but if they give you valid reasoning for their change in direction then that’s fair enough. As you say, it shows they’re capable of weighing up new developments in an issue and understanding where change is needed.

US elections have always appeared to me to be more about mud-slinging and ridiculing the opposition, and throwing enough catch-words and cash at the right people to muscle your way to the top. But then I’m an outsider and only see what the media shows me, so what would I know? 😀