Kirsten Gillibrand kicked off her presidential bid recently (for some reason) in the city of Troy, New York. Since that time, she hasn’t exactly been taken to task by the media. But if any reporters are looking for subjects to question her about, they might consider her stunning series of flip-flops on topics running across the entire political spectrum. She’s starting off this campaign in a similar fashion, once again reversing a position she held not that long ago when representing an upstate New York district in Congress.

When the subject of driver’s licenses for illegal aliens was brought up, the New York senator took the default Democratic position of saying that such individuals need a license to be able to get around and take care of their family. (Daily Caller)

Democratic New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand reversed her position on allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses only a day after she announced that she will seek the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2020.

Gillibrand told reporters just outside of Troy, New York, during her presidential campaign kickoff Wednesday that she is now supportive of granting illegal immigrants the ability to procure a driver’s license, reported the New York Daily News.

“I think we have to make it possible for people to provide for their families,” the New York senator said. “We need comprehensive immigration reform. Without doing that, you’re not going to get the problem solved for the rest of the country.”

That’s an interesting position for her to take when you consider that she told reporters during her 2008 congressional campaign that proof of citizenship should definitely be a requirement for obtaining a driver’s license. During more normal times, such a flip-flop would have attracted the scrutiny of the press. Of course, reporters may have already reached the saturation point when it comes to Gillibrand doing an about-face on her campaign talking points and they no longer pay much attention.

We’re not just talking about driver’s licenses here. Kirsten Gillibrand has reversed her positions on everything from gun rights to abortion, and she did it in a remarkably short period of time. It’s not that human beings can’t evolve and change their views over time. Some people experience a critical, defining moment and might “see the light” on a given subject. Others may skew more liberal in their youth and then slowly find themselves siding with more conservative positions as they mature.

That’s not what happened with Kirsten Gillibrand. It wasn’t even ten years ago when she was representing NY-20 in Congress. And by then she was already in her forties. At that time she was so much of a blue dog that the NRA gave her an A rating. When the Governor plucked her from that office and appointed her to Hillary Clinton’s old Senate seat, the Huffington Post described Gillibrand as “a bizarro version of Sarah Palin.”

As soon as Gillibrand was seated in the Senate she obviously realized that she would need to win a statewide race and carry the Democrats in New York City. (The same applies for a national bid to win over the Democrats’ liberal base.) Seemingly overnight, Gillibrand was a progressive feminist who supported abortion in all cases, loved illegal aliens and thought gun bans might be just the ticket for America.

The only times I’ve heard the Senator challenged on these amazing flip-flops, she’s trotted out what appears to be her default talking point. She claims that she went through a process of “learning more and expanding my views.” Yes… what she learned was that her old positions didn’t sell with the liberal base so she dumped them. So there you have it. The 2008 and 2019 Kirsten Gillibrand models are as different as day and night. But if Democrats nominate her and possibly even send her to the White House, which one will they get? Or is there possibly a Gillibrand 3.0 model waiting out there for the next shift in the political winds?