Look carefully, and you often can see political flip-flops coming before they arrive.
I doubt the politician’s thinking evolves very often, as they routinely claim. What does evolve is their language and tone (along with their political calculation, of course).
Parse Hillary’s language last night regarding Glass-Steagall, and that was on full display.
At October’s debate, Hillary’s opposition to re-instituting Glass-Steagall was firm. Last night, it was squishy, at best, bordering on “I’m not opposed to re-instituting Glass-Steagall; I just don’t think it’s the answer.”
What’s at play here? Two competing factors, I think. The first, which has controlled the political calculus so far, is the general election. If she promotes the re-insitution of Glass-Steagall, the avalanche of Wall Street cash to the Republican side will be horrific. The second is undoubtedly ugly polling of Democratic primary voters on the issue, which is generating concerns about vulnerability.
Last night, then, Clinton was setting up a potential change in position. If Sanders’ poll numbers rise and he does well in the early primary going, the shift may occur. Otherwise, no.
What are her true feelings? Do we really need ask? After all, she received multiple six-figure speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, right?