Is a political pivot now a career-ender? 

America is wrestling with an age-old question: is it OK to change your mind, especially if you’re in politics? 

For a politician to alter their stance on an issue can either be taken as a sign of evolving wisdom or an indication that the person is a chameleon constantly changing colors — something experts say can be a source of discomfort for many. 

Politicians are often charged with “pivoting” on issues, but knowing when it is a major U-turn or a slight deviation is not always easy. 

Evolving issues like gay marriage have caused many Americans to re-think their stance over time. In an analysis by the Wall Street Journal, the change in thinking is real, and “what was once the white-hot center of political debate has receded to the background.”  

Polls show that close to three-fourths of Americans now support same-sex marriage; 20 years ago, only about 40 percent reported support for the issue. 

But changing one’s mind in politics can be dicey, leading to accusations of pandering or “flip-flopping” — a charge that can end careers. 

So let’s take a look at a variety of topics, and see how presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris measure up as they prepare to debate each other next month. 

How are the candidates positioned on banning TikTok, the controversial social media app? 

Harris is still the vice president, so it is fair to look at her policies while in office as well as her positions as a candidate. 

Last April, the Biden-Harris administration signed a bill that gives TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, a deadline of January 2025 to sell the company or risk being prohibited from American stores and “from internet hosting services that support it.” 

A month before the Biden announcement, in March 2024, Harris said on ABC News, “We do not intend to ban TikTok. That is not at all the goal or the purpose of this conversation. We need to deal with the owner, and we have national security concerns about the owner of TikTok, but we have no intention to ban TikTok.” 

As a candidate for president, Harris has been using TikTok even as some members of Congress want its parent company banned. 

Trump has done more of an about-face on banning TikTok, expressing concerns in 2020 that the Chinese app could be a national security threat used by Beijing and attempting to ban it from Apple stores and Google. Recently, however, the former president seemed to embrace it, saying he doesn’t want TikTok competitor Facebook to do better because it is the “enemy of the people.”  

Both candidates have wavered on immigration, but Harris has done more bobbing and weaving than Trump. Her record in the past as attorney general in California reflects both a crackdown on transnational crimes emanating from Mexico and support for immigrant communities. Now, she is advocating a harder stance on security at the border.  

Trump has remained a hardliner on immigration, arguing that the Biden administration has been focused on “open borders” and saying on X that he believes 20 million people have crossed the border under President Biden without authorization — a number that does not match official statistics, which showed about half that number in 2021.  

Trump has advocated both in 2020 and today a policy of mass deportations; he does not explain, though, precisely how that would be implemented.  

Third, in a rare moment of agreement, both Harris and Trump say they want to relieve workers who rely on tips from federal taxation. Tax experts disagree with both candidates on the economic wisdom of such a policy.  

The one place where Harris should have a clean debate against Trump is on the importance of keeping the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as Obamacare, that in 2010 set standards for comprehensive health coverage. In a previous run for office, she advocated for a single-payer option.  

Trump tried to have the Supreme Court overturn the act in 2020, and has consistently threatened to replace Obamacare in a second term. Now the GOP nominee says he is “not running to terminate” it, but can “make it better.” 

In America, anything is possible, including major changes in policy, politics, rhetoric, even reactions to public opinion. What we do not yet know is how far American voters will change in November from their nearly split views on today’s presidential candidates. For now, that remains a great mystery. 

Tara D. Sonenshine is senior nonresident fellow at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.