Should your party work with the other side

Sleepy Joe is in trouble with perpetually offended Corey Booker and other progressives for waxing nostalgic about days when he could work with Republican segregationists to "get things done," meaning pass legislation for the good of the country because "that's our job."

Fox is reporting tonight that it has polled both R's and D's and that they both, manifestly, do NOT want their party to "work with " the other side (evidence of my pet theory that we are currently in a non shooting civil war.)

How about you? On immigration, the budget, taxes, environmental protection, foreign policy, do you want your party to seek common ground with your opponent party, or dig in for a take-no-prisoners approach? I think Biden is right and grudgingly respect him for not groveling again. Me, I'm getting tired of the war. We are wasting too much energy.

 

I would like to believe that I had some commonality with Democrats but I gotta tell you, a very aggressive part of them are batsh** crazy. We are in big trouble in this country because it looks like it's either or from here on out. No us except in the sense of us or them.

We can't fix the real problems this way. Immigration needs a complete overhaul and that is just impossible in this atmosphere. Now we have Iran to deal with on top of that and it's looking like it could get serious.

 

They should compromise and as long as both parties walk away unsatisfied then it worked.

 

Should your party work with the other side
As Americans we ALWAYS have far more in common with each other than we have differences. The focus has been far too focused on those differences since 2010, & possibly as far back as 1994. We DO need to reverse that focus & find our common ground & work with each other to resolve issues & fix problems we all care about. That's the way our predecessors did it. That's the way to be a successful nation.

 

I don't know, the difference is fundamental and I don't know if there is room for compromise. I think politicians want to but they have built the barrier that is there and it may be impossible to bridge.

 

Let's hope things aren't that bad. The last time compromise became impossible, we had the Civil War, and that's something I hope none of us wants to repeat.

 

I can't think of a single issue that compromise is possible on. You?

 

Compromise is possible on any & every issue. You just have to elect politicians who value compromise.

 

Compromise should always be the rule for the good of the country. We do not have that now because it’s all about what’s good for the party. Democrats and Republicans care first and foremost about re-election campaigns. Instead of coming together and finding middle ground they would rather castigate each other thru opprobrious rhetoric. Special interest groups have to be taken care of because after Election Day the voters are out on the back burner for the next two years.

 

No, you elect politicians who share your values and that you trust to try to work out solutions that you will find acceptable.

 

Representatives from both parties need to go on extensive listening tours. Both sides are out of touch with their constituents. Let the people decide what the priorities are - let the people decide what they want done. From there, party shouldn't matter.

 

Nicely & accurately said. I agree completely.

 

Your comment doesn't negate my own. Yes, you elect politicians who agree with you, but you also support compromises for the good of the country. Democracy REQUIRES compromise to succeed as an institution or as a nation.

 

We have three major issues, guns, gays and abortions. Can you see any kind of acceptable compromise available for any of those issues?

 

Gun, gays & abortions are NOT my three prime issues. Based on the way you cite them, I assume they are yours. Based on past experience on this forum & other sources, those who regard this particular selection of issues as their most important ones, those people tend to be strongly conservative in their views. While there are still some conservatives who recognize and appreciate the power of compromise, the numbers of conservatives in that category has been shrinking since 1994 & even more swiftly since 2010. For them, ideology & getting their way is more important than compromise or the health or success of the nation. These people care little about the concerns of others. They care about getting what they want themselves. As long as they are empowered, compromise will continue being nothing but a dream. The best hope for the nation is in dis-empowering them.

 

Those are the over riding issues in the country, not just for me. I think you made my case with your suggestion that conservatives be exterminated. What three issues are primary to you if these are not?

 

1. I never said anything about "extermination." I said dis-empower them. The two terms are NOT synonymous.
2. I have more than three issues that concern me right now. They would include: access to healthcare for all; finding ways to decrease the disparity of wealth between the wealthiest & the rest of us; get the government of the U.S. into an active leadership role in dealing with global warming issues.

 

I can't see you and me sitting down and working out any compromises. I see you as a hard core socialist and the only common ground we might have would be healthcare. Which of the three issues I listed do you see us finding a meeting point on?

 

Newt Gingrich is the one who started the no compromising garbage.

 

I didn't specify my own feelings toward the three issues you mentioned, partly because most conservatives are past the point of compromise, but perhaps you're one who still believes in it. I am a liberal, & I do. Ok, from your list:
Guns - I support the 2nd Amendment, but feel it's no worse to have background checks & register guns & their serial numbers in the names of their owners, than to have to have a license to drive a car or ride a motorcycle. I don't support selling automatic weapons to private owners. I also believe we should have strict legal controls over the sale of silencers.
Gays - I believe love is something the world needs more of, & there's no such thing as "bad" love. I don't personally care how that love is expressed. All love is good. I've had several good gay friends during my life, and found gays to be highly intelligent, friendly, and highly creative people. Gays are NOT an issue for me.
Abortion - I am Pro-Choice, but not Pro-Abortion. I believe the rights of the mother take precedence over the fetus during the first trimester, & she should have the freedom to make any decision she feels appropriate for her condition. Beginning with the 2nd trimester, things get more complicated, & I feel fetal rights begin to grow in importance as a consideration in any abortion decision. I only support abortions during the third trimester if the life of the mother is at risk, the fetus is already dead, or if the fetus is found to have a severe, debilitating health issue that would make its life after birth a living nightmare--& there are such diseases. I also feel most Pro-Life supporters aren't actually "Pro-Life" as much as they are Pro-Fetus, because few of them seem to care what the quality of life will be for the baby after birth. I find that attitude hypocritical.

 

That's where my 1994 date in my post came from.

 

So now everybody is duty bound to continue?

I have no problem with background checks, I own several guns and a cc permit so I have been through many of them. I do have a problem with registering guns, the pro gun lobby is not paranoid when they see that as the first step in confiscation. What's wrong with silencers/suppressors? They don't make a gun more deadly and they don't silence the weapon like the movies portrays them to do.

I have problems with the politics of the gay activists. I don't really care where they stick it as long as I'm not involved. So you know, I don't like to see any couple in a public place that are really ready for a motel room regardless of their orientation.

I don't like abortion as a last ditch birth control. I'm ok with the life of the mother and health of the baby thing but take a pill for crying out loud.

 

Pay raises for Congress. "Can't we all ... sniff ... get along?"

 

Theoretically, working together to a compromise is how politics work.

In practice, both sides are working together behind the scenes against us The People, and most often 'compromise' what we want so they can get what they want from 'the other side.'

Im happy with both sides obsessing over Trump while Trump builds walls, renegs trade agreements, bolsters the economy and tweetrolls snowflakes. Trump making slow progress is way better than the progs and rinos making things worse.

Until we elect better representatives, I'll settle for bipartisan deadlock.