Screen grab via Giphy.

It’s an understatement to say there have been a helluva lot of hot takes concerning the Iowa Democratic caucus fiascos that took place on Monday night.

While some have been understandably serious, others have been hilarious – both intentionally and unintentionally.

In the case of Never Trumper Jennifer Rubin, however, perhaps the best description of her takes falls somewhere within the category of “predictable – but worth documenting anyway for the record.”

So worth documenting, in fact, that even Media Matters’ Jordan Uhl got in on the act.

Uhl happened to do a little digging on Rubin to see what her opinions on the Iowa caucuses have been in the past versus what they are now. What he found is that, as has been the case with myriad other issues concerning Rubin, she’s performed quite a flipflopperoni on the importance of the caucuses:

This just gave me whiplash pic.twitter.com/4ummqFG82d

— jordan (@JordanUhl) February 4, 2020

pic.twitter.com/VpK11nteAQ

— jordan (@JordanUhl) February 4, 2020

Other Twitter users noticed, too:

Hey Jennifer Rubin what changed?

😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/47RxYorKcc

— The Weeping Wombat 😢 (@DaWittyWombat) February 4, 2020

Our girl Jennifer Rubin never fails to be consistent. pic.twitter.com/cCVjSCXNts

— 🤖 (@ssimilated) February 4, 2020

And this is why people shake their heads at the “elite” national media 🤷🏼‍♀️ #IowaCaucus pic.twitter.com/YN46iVdvHv

— Terry Lathan (@ChairmanLathan) February 4, 2020

In the interest of fairness, Greg P. over at our sister site Twitchy pulled up the two opinion pieces just to see what the differences were. Sure enough, her opinions were diametrically opposed to each other.

May 2019 – Iowa is “so important” because the crowd of contenders will get smaller “quickly”:

a gigantic field playing with a 15 percent rule makes it that much harder for real underdogs to survive. That makes, for better or worse, Iowa and New Hampshire absolutely critical for a whole lot of contenders. https://t.co/VcYh6L7qyb

— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) May 13, 2019

Third, the field is likely to shrink quickly. A batch will exit after New Hampshire or Iowa, and others will vanish after Super Tuesday (March 3, 2020). We might not have a winner by early March, but we are in all likelihood going to be down to a handful of contenders.

February 2020 – the Iowa caucuses maybe shouldn’t be first in the nation because they don’t “winnow” the field fast enough:

There is very little incentive for any candidate to get out at this point given the debate later in the week and New Hampshire four days after that. So why is Iowa in first place if it does not winnow the field? https://t.co/Rjv0q1jFVq

— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) February 3, 2020

There are bound to be a whole bunch of candidates during the Iowa caucuses on Monday night who do not meet the 15 percent threshold, do not get delegates and do not make it out of single digits. What do those candidates do, and when do they do it? Theoretically, the idea has been that some of those candidates get out. In this case, however, there is reason to doubt that will happen.

Oh well. At least she’s moved on from fangirling over Adam Schiff. For now, anyway.