Passage Summary: Alice thinks politicians stick to their campaign promises, causing big policy swings. Elwell thinks they compromise once in office to get things done, which suggests more stability.

Conclusion: Alice and Elwell disagree on whether the policies of democratic governments change drastically when new parties take power.

Reasoning: Alice argues that politicians must follow their campaign rhetoric, leading to wild fluctuations, while Elwell contends that politicians soften their positions to build majority coalitions.

Analysis: To identify the point at issue, we apply the Agree/Disagree test to the central claim. Alice explicitly states that policies fluctuate 'wildly' because politicians are bound by their campaign rhetoric. Elwell counters this by noting that the practical need for coalitions 'softens' those stands, implying a lack of such wild fluctuations. Look for an answer that captures this conflict over the consistency or volatility of democratic policy-making. It's the classic debate between campaign poetry and the prose of governing.