With more and more at-the-fingertips-access to information that facilitates fact-checking, easy news consumption, and familiarity with tools that allow people to learn the truth about records, statements, and actions in a matter of seconds, why on Earth would candidates think they can partake of even a little of this nonsense without getting called out and suffering the consequences?

Are they simply assuming that everyone else will do the same, and therefore, they won’t suffer more for it—a sort of proverbial race to the bottom that won’t actually count in the end? Or are they banking on information overload among interested observers and winning enough votes from people who loathe them just a little less than the next flip-flopping joker to win whatever election is next? Do they think that every “impure” stance is going to have the killer effect that being a proud, pro-choice Republican or a proud, pro-life Democrat would? In very rare cases, sticking to one’s guns could mean electoral death—but this is very much the exception, rather than the norm. 

Whatever the reason, it’s beyond time for candidates to start limiting their floor routine excesses, and quit taking the easy, tempting, quick hit of shifting position any time the going gets even remotely rough. Figure out what you stand for. Know what you believe. If you have a legitimate change of opinion, fine, but recognize that that will be rare and that voters understand that fact.