Once again, a "Jewish question." Someone gets up and makes a statement, then just throws in a question mark at the end.
See "emunas chachamim" discussed here.
There's no way to really answer this; but to help inform the discussion, I will limit this to two students of Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveichik (shlit'a to them both) discussing their mentor's views on the subject:
Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff: as a young man, Rabbi Soloveichik's eulogy for Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grozinski stated that great rabbis should be followed in not just halachic matters but political ones, too. Rabbi Soloveichik reversed course later in life and his sermon "Joseph and his Brothers" stated that matters of Jewish thought aren't ruled-upon the same way; in fact, G-d had ruled in accordance with the Mizrachi (i.e. religious Zionist) Jews. Someone asked Rabbi Soloveichik, "but what about daas torah?" "Don't tell me 'daas torah' after the Holocaust", he replied.
Rabbi Mordechai Willig: there's no need to say that Soloveichik ever retracted. But there are two major caveats to the concept of 'daas torah' - superiority of Torah scholar's opinions on all contemporary matters - as advanced by Soloveichik in his eulogy for Grozinski. A.] Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grozinski was a general "posek." He ruled on agunah questions, kashrus questions, shabbos questions, and every other field on practical halacha. He was thus also qualified to rule on political questions. Rabbi Willig then cautiously observes that many "big rabbi" names today are known for the leadership of a yeshiva or Hassidic group, but many are not known for regularly ruling on matters of technical halacha; they would thus not merit the same "daas Torah" attributed to Grozinski by Soloveichik. B.] There can be many different opinions. Your great posek had one opinion, my great posek has another opinion; we're each entitled to follow those different opinions.