There is of course a big gap between honestly trying to improve stale old situations and outright table-flipping. Neither could you or should you really be passionate about "Hail the new chief, marginally dissimilar to the old chief!", naturally, but where has political passion ever been unequivocably rewarded, against the same-ol' same ol'..?
Heads and hearts (and the cold, dry cut of subsequent reality, to make it a proper triumvirate of uncontrollable factors) rarely lead to the same (unqualifiably good) result. And there are far too many table-flippers. Or people who would enjoy seeing the table flipped by others, even if they don't know which table it'll be.
(I could point out Truss, or Johnson, over here. Corbyn, for a short but intense time was definitely "the thing" amongst anybody not actually on the other side of any of his classic arguments. Of course "the B-word" (barely, but FPTP rather than nuanced). Clegg's nearly-there opportunities, following on from Blair's actual ones. Maggie was this, initially... Not sure how much further back I should go with anyone here. I mean even I don't go back as far as Attlee, but then that was a case of an already pretty flipped table where the argument was how might the room be refurnished. For the US, the previous anomaly was perhaps just the other side's response to Obama, and you could argue at least every other prior President (and any number of congresscritters/etc) was a form of table-flipper. Reagan, yes, by his (and Carter's) era's standards; Bush Sr, not so much, etc... But it seems to me that tables are getting flipped harder and faster and more frequently. Or maybe I'm just minimising what I previously experienced, when younger.)