# Constructive political compromise -- possible? Desirable? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 19, 2019, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983 "2019-10-19T01:48:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/41 "2019-10-22T02:39:19Z")
If the posters of this board and in this thread are any indication of the real feelings of the left then abs-o-fucking-lutely NO compromise. Why should anyone have to compromise with another person/group who calls them Nazis & Racists & whatever else? I despise the hardcore left more than just about anything and I’m in full support of any politician who gives them a nice public middle finger at every available opportunity. I mean Kavanaugh was a perfect example of the pure filth the left will lay out without a fucking care in the world. Compromise with that? Fuck no. The game is broken, both sides do everything in their power to manipulate, poison-pill, soundbite. Everything is an angle. Bills are blocked for no good reason other than not wanting the other side to have a win. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/42 "2019-10-22T03:10:51Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > I mean Kavanaugh was a perfect example of the pure filth the left will lay out without a fucking care in the world. Compromise with that? Fuck no. > > . I’m genuinely curious what was so wrong about what was done to Kavanaugh. If he has a history of sexually abusing women that is going to factor into his attitudes about women’s rights. Also the right has no issue going back to the 70s to dig up dirt on the Clintons, so why is this different? ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/43 "2019-10-22T03:51:06Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > When I was learning to drive, there was a rather narrow busy 2-lane street near our house. When I was driving alone with my mother she said I was too close to the parked cars. When I was driving alone with my father he said I was too close to the center line. Even at 15 I figured out I must be doing it about right. > > My attitude towards a centrist, bi-partisan, compromise approach to national politics is that we need someone who wants to and who can make it work. I might still agitate for a more liberal answer to issues than the compromise position, but I would still celebrate any moves in my direction. > > I think it’s a mistake to call the entire Republican party corrupt or insane. There is plenty of corruption to go around in both parties; I don’t think it’s the fault of the ideology, it’s the fault of there being so much money in it, as **Kearsen 1** mentioned. Reform of the things that allow money to rule is a genuinely bi-partisan issue that it should be possible to sell to the voters. > > One issue I would like to talk about is the possibility of understanding what it is that the other guy really wants. You don’t do this by throwing brickbats or cherry-picking the most outrageous thing you can find. You do it by asking, and listening, and validating that you heard correctly. For example, some Trump supporters like him because he is so clearly not a politician. This is more important to them than policies or issues they don’t really understand, but because they are so sick and tired of politicians who, by and large, talk out of one side of their mouths while acting completely differently. They seem to like that they can often understand where he is coming from and what he wants. The idea that what he wants is not good for the country doesn’t seem to resonate as much. > > So how do you address that? By calling them names? Their dislike of regular politicians is very understandable to me. There’s a way of talking that instantly says “politician weasel words” to me. The way to address that is to meet the need with an outspoken and straight-speaking candidate who says plainly what they mean, and who means generally good things for the country. That’s supposed to be political suicide. I would sure like to see that proven wrong. > > Of course this person would have to be smart enough not to be taken in, and strong enough not to be walked over. That’s a pretty tall order, and I rather doubt the Democrats have anyone like that in their stable this round. I also use a car analogy for politics, you can’t have a car that only has an accelerator (Progressivism) or only has a brake (Conservatism) is useless, you need both because while it’s good that you can accelerate towards a destination if you don’t have functioning brakes you are going nowhere but the hospital. I would say that, personally I think that the people on the pedal-to-the-metal side of the continuum are the most likely to cause the most damage; I do recognize that parking in the middle of a train crossing is bound to end in tragedy, but statistically speaking, its the speeding that kills. This is why, if anything, I’d call myself a moderate, which contrary to what the extremist love to claim doesn’t mean that if I’m in a car going 100km/h and a dear old lady walks into the road my choice would be to slow down to 50km/h and run down the old lady anyway. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/44 "2019-10-22T04:21:16Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I’m genuinely curious what was so wrong about what was done to Kavanaugh. If he has a history of sexually abusing women … That’s a pretty big “if” ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/45 "2019-10-22T09:47:53Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I’m genuinely curious what was so wrong about what was done to Kavanaugh. If he has a history of sexually abusing women That was one of the biggest and most obvious attempts at public humiliation and slander I think I’ve ever seen and was so obviously partisan it was insane. Its plays into the Democrats whole strategy where facts dont matter, just news cycles and soundbites, truth and objectivity be damned. > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Also the right has no issue going back to the 70s to dig up dirt on the Clintons, so why is this different? The Clintons are legacy Democrats with actual dirt to dig up. But again, it seems like the left justifies everything they do by what the right does, aka a twisted form of ‘retaliation’ so I guess if thats the political standard you wanna go by then go for it. ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/46 "2019-10-22T12:12:19Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > Suppose your side wins the presidency and both houses in 2020. See, here’s the thing: That outcome _would_ be the compromise. There’s no way the Democrats can pull this off without lots of former GOP voters essentially deciding for themselves to compromise with the Democratic Party, in opposition to what the GOP has become over the last 10 years. Compromise with the GOP party leadership is effectively impossible at this point. But with their voters? Maybe. Leave the GOP party out in the cold for a few election cycles, and see if that convinces them to reign in the crazy wing. This is pretty much where I am at with respect to Canadian politics, btw. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/47 "2019-10-22T12:35:01Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > That was one of the biggest and most obvious attempts at public humiliation and slander I think I’ve ever seen and was so obviously partisan it was insane. Its plays into the Democrats whole strategy where facts dont matter, just news cycles and soundbites, truth and objectivity be damned. > > The Clintons are legacy Democrats with actual dirt to dig up. > > But again, it seems like the left justifies everything they do by what the right does, aka a twisted form of ‘retaliation’ so I guess if thats the political standard you wanna go by then go for it. So your argument is its ok when Republicans dig up dirt but when democrats do it it is unfair slander? To me, you are so radicalized that facts, law, morality and good/evil have been abandoned in favor of tribalism. You remind me of the gop voters who felt Roy Moore was being ‘railroaded’ because the press investigated him being a child abuser. ---
**Author:** ![survinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@survinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/survinga)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/48 "2019-10-22T13:03:29Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Go back to 2008 and ask that question. I think Obama sacrificed his whole presidency on this point. The Republicans said publicly that their only goal was to prevent Obama from winning reelection. Obama was a slightly rewarmed Republican health care proposal. But not one single Republican supported it and now they are trying their damnedest to destroy it in the courts. Had Obama known what was coming he could have put in a real medicare for all plan with his 60 votes in the senate. Now anything like that is dead for a generation. If anything, the Republicans are even less interested in compromise now than they were 10 years ago. If he had tried for an M4A plan in 2008, it wouldn’t have passed even with a filibuster-proof senate. There were Democrats who wouldn’t pass the ACA with a public option. So, I don’t think there’s anything else that Obama or Pelosi could’ve done at that time, even with large majorities in the Senate. The Democrats were bargaining amongst themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/49 "2019-10-22T17:07:23Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > **XT** , IIRC, voted for Hillary. **Puddle** is _definitely_ no moderate. Recall **Hurricane** ’s famous quote about Tim McVeigh: How could you possibly call him a moderate? > [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > I don’t recall. Could you link to that quote please? Thanks. > [@Post your unpopular opinions](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-your-unpopular-opinions/806001/165): > > > [@Post your unpopular opinions](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-your-unpopular-opinions/806001/165): > > > > I think Timothy McVeigh’s actions were not an entirely unreasonable reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco. > [@septimus](#): > > I’m curious. Does #37 have an effect on this assessment? @\*\*septimus \*\*- I realize you offered this loosely in response to ongoing discussions, but this is a hijack and it’s out of place in this forum to personalize discussion in this fashion. You seem to have a fixation on this particular point. I have previously cautioned you against bringing this up in unrelated threads else you be warned for harassment: > [@Dems - Defend your Senators holding the budget bill hostage](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-defend-your-senators-holding-the-budget-bill-hostage/806968/181): > > I considered issuing a warning for this given my previous note in post #166, but I am open to the possibility it wasn’t crystal clear. McVeigh isn’t germane to this thread. Introducing it in this fashion is akin to harassment. Don’t do this any further. > > [/moderating] After that instruction, you proceeded to bring it up several times. In chronological order: > [@Should Antifa violence be condemned?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-antifa-violence-be-condemned/819902/280): > > Oh, _ **Hurricane** _. I remember you! > > Have we asked the liberals whether they can condemn Timothy McAntifa’s mass murder of 169 people in Oklahoma? Sure, that massacre committed by a liberal crusader wasn’t entirely unreasonable, and hardly as egregious as petite Yvette Felarca’s oh-so-very-unreasonable shoving of a Nazi; but you’d think these liberal hypocrites would at least offer a token apology. They got their panties twisted when despicable Heather Heyer threw herself in front of a Nazi car which couldn’t stop in time, but can’t quite bring themselves to admit McAntifa’s mass murder in Oklahoma wasn’t entirely reasonable. Sheeeeesh. How can you pro-Nazis put up with this place? > [@President Donald Trump: "Democrats Produce Mobs, Republicans Produce Jobs"](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/president-donald-trump-democrats-produce-mobs-republicans-produce-jobs/823233/174): > > To paraphrase OP when he was applauding the [patriotic gesture of Tim McVeigh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing), I’m not entirely sure that Mr. Ditka is entirely … > > [deleted] > [@Commonality of the Political Spectrum?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/commonality-of-the-political-spectrum/821334/17): > > Too optimistic? Perhaps. But we must hope for something, lest we start thinking that solutions involving explosives are not entirely unreasonable. > [@Did Pelosi just un-invite Trump from the State of the Union?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-pelosi-just-un-invite-trump-from-the-state-of-the-union/827898/148): > > @ **Hurricane** : Your insightful commentaries are always … interesting to read; but I, for one, wish you’d sometimes follow through and complete a thought. Would that be entirely unreasonable? > [@Did Pelosi just un-invite Trump from the State of the Union?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-pelosi-just-un-invite-trump-from-the-state-of-the-union/827898/355): > > Once upon a time it wasn’t entirely unreasonable to think some of the posts from you two were not entirely unreasonable. What happened? Dawning realization that your boy is an incompetent criminal is causing cognitive breakdown? > [@Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is a really, really bad guy.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-a-really-really-bad-guy/829182/48): > > Are you sure AOC’s diction is entirely unreasonable? \*\* If you continue to bring up McVeigh, “entirely unreasonable”, or anything that I think is along those lines a single time in any GD or Elections thread in any fashion that isn’t specifically and directly related to the topic, you will receive a warning. Do not do this again. \*\* [/moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/50 "2019-10-22T17:19:18Z")
There are compromise-able issues and uncompromisable ones. Fixing the budget deficit/debt is perfectly compromisable. Just get Democrats to agree to enough spending cuts, and Republicans to agree to enough tax hikes, and you get there. Abortion, on the other hand, is not compromisable. You have one side who considers abortion to be murder (how can you agree to 50% murders instead of 100%?) and another side who sees it as a blatant violation of a woman’s autonomy and right to her body (how can you agree to a woman being controlled/overriden only 50% instead of 100%?) There is no happy middle ground. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/51 "2019-10-22T17:50:42Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > There are compromise-able issues and uncompromisable ones. > > Fixing the budget deficit/debt is perfectly compromisable. Just get Democrats to agree to enough spending cuts, and Republicans to agree to enough tax hikes, and you get there. > > Abortion, on the other hand, is not compromisable. You have one side who considers abortion to be murder (how can you agree to 50% murders instead of 100%?) and another side who sees it as a blatant violation of a woman’s autonomy and right to her body (how can you agree to a woman being controlled/overriden only 50% instead of 100%?) There is no happy middle ground. You don’t compromise in that way. You compromise in whatever the general consensus is about the bright red line. Like now. Hint: There aren’t really all that many (and I’d bet the number is falling as well) that believe that abortion is truly murder ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/52 "2019-10-22T21:15:49Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I’m curious. Does #37 have an effect on this assessment? Let’s not get into making personal observations about other posters. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2019, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/53 "2019-10-22T21:29:36Z")
> [@Horatius](#): > > Compromise with the GOP party leadership is effectively impossible at this point. But with their voters? Maybe. Leave the GOP party out in the cold for a few election cycles, and see if that convinces them to reign in the crazy wing. I think that any voters who currently support Trump have been fully trained to a hateful, oppositional mindset. I do not think they are interested in compromise. I’ve proposed that the democrats should take control and unilaterally implement policies to help the rural poor. I fully believe that a disturbingly large portion of the rural poor would hate and oppose their efforts on this front, sheerly because they’re Democrats and thus their plans must be evil. I’m less sure whether they’d come to such conclusions if they weren’t being continuously fed bile by the republicans, their media, and the russians. Maybe they would start to recover without regular infusions. Or maybe they’re permanently corrupted. I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/54 "2019-10-23T04:14:47Z")
I apologize for the inappropriate comments. There’s a related discussion active in BBQ Pit and I get the two threads conflated. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/55 "2019-10-23T05:05:18Z")
Back before Obama’s presidency I might have said that partisan politics were the issue and we need to get out of our entrenched positions and come towards the middle. But Obama tried to do that and they thoroughly shafted him for it. They still talk about him as the worst president ever even as he acceded to many of their demands. And now, under Trump, the republican party has gone full wackadoodle and is busy shredding the constitution and any sense of decency or rationality. Now, it might be the case that some democrat policies might overlap with republican policies in some areas. And that’s fine. But actually constructively working with the GOP and compromising is sadly not possible and won’t be for a long time. ETA: The media constantly “both sides”-ing everything, and talking about “polarization” is not helping at this point. It just enables the GOP to get more shameless. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/56 "2019-10-23T17:09:24Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Back before Obama’s presidency I might have said that partisan politics were the issue and we need to get out of our entrenched positions and come towards the middle. > > But Obama tried to do that and they thoroughly shafted him for it. They still talk about him as the worst president ever even as he acceded to many of their demands. > (snip) I know this is a frequent narrative, but I don’t really remember him acceding to a lot of right-wing demands. My sense is more of things that couldn’t be accomplished because of the opposition in Congress, including the Republican threat to filibuster during the first two years of his time in office. Also, Obama was somewhat notorious for not consulting Congress about much of anything – he just thought he should propose stuff and let the legislative process happen, without trying to grease the wheels at all. He didn’t seem to believe in, or perhaps he was uncomfortable with, making deals. So can you recall and mention here any specific cases where Obama either tried cross-party compromise, or acceded to Republican demands? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/57 "2019-10-23T17:33:30Z")
I recall hearing that Obamacare went back and forth for a while and was riddled with attempts to cede just enough ground to get the republicans on board. But sure, if you’re going to tell me that Obama dropped the stack of paper on the table and it was promptly passed with no discussion or modifications then sure, I’ll believe that, because I’m the credulous sort. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/58 "2019-10-23T17:53:54Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > Something I heard on NPR this morning, I don’t remember what, triggered a thought about a possible presidential candidate (for example) whose platform had the over-arching theme of bipartisanship first, and specific programs second. Someone who was wholly dedicated to reducing partisanship and accepting that “the other side” does, sometimes, have a point, and then acting (or at least proposing actions) accordingly. This candidate would have as their first principle the cooling off of the body politic. > > Could you support such a candidate? Right, that’s the ideal candidate to me… if they existed. “_It wouldn’t be that way with me. I swear, it wouldn’t. I’d take only what I set out to get_.” ~Frank C. Dobbs ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/59 "2019-10-23T21:18:05Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > There are compromise-able issues and uncompromisable ones. > > Fixing the budget deficit/debt is perfectly compromisable. Just get Democrats to agree to enough spending cuts, and Republicans to agree to enough tax hikes, and you get there. > > Abortion, on the other hand, is not compromisable. You have one side who considers abortion to be murder (how can you agree to 50% murders instead of 100%?) and another side who sees it as a blatant violation of a woman’s autonomy and right to her body (how can you agree to a woman being controlled/overriden only 50% instead of 100%?) There is no happy middle ground. As far as fixing the budget, I disagree. Obama tried to pass a long term budget policy and the GOP opposed it because it had some tax hikes and because they were scared of being seen as friendly to Obama. I’m glad the bill failed since it may have increased the medicare age, but he did offer a bill of tax hikes and spending cuts. > **[Obama Offered To Raise Medicare Eligibility Age As Part Of Grand Debt Deal](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-medicare-eligibility-age_n_894833)** > > Obama Offered To Raise Medicare Eligibility Age As Part Of Grand Debt Deal > [@](#): > > And with Republicans having turned down a “grand” deal on the debt ceiling — which would have included $3 trillion in spending cuts, including entitlement reforms, in exchange for up to $1 trillion in revenues — it is unclear whether the proposal remains alive The republican party today is not the GOP under Reagan, when bipartisan compromise to make the country a better place was an option. THe GOP has seen almost all white people who score high in authoritarianism move away from democrats and become republicans, while their southern strategy and racial resentment strategy means the base of the GOP party is now full of racists, authoritarians and religious fundamentalists. You can’t govern when your politicians are a reflection of people who fall into these categories. I don’t think compromise is very possible, because GOP politicians know their voters will punish them for it. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2019, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983/60 "2019-10-23T21:42:38Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I recall hearing that Obamacare went back and forth for a while and was riddled with attempts to cede just enough ground to get the republicans on board. But sure, if you’re going to tell me that Obama dropped the stack of paper on the table and it was promptly passed with no discussion or modifications then sure, I’ll believe that, because I’m the credulous sort. Pretty much the exception, though, if I am remembering correctly. My opinion was that he did it because he wanted a success on a big piece of legislation in an important area, and this was it. Now, since I asked for “any specific cases” and you provided one, I don’t want to be accused of moving the goalposts. I acknowledge that this was a notable instance. But I do contend that one instance, even a notable one, doesn’t really warrant a conclusion. When I spoke of Obama not consulting Congress, I was mostly referring to his unwillingness or inability to establish relationships with important people in the House and Senate, that he held himself aloof for the most part. Maybe he wasn’t willing to horse-trade like others have done. As a personal trait it’s possibly admirable, but the record shows it is not effective within the halls of power in Washington. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constructive-political-compromise-possible-desirable/841983.md?page=4)