U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-18-2011, 01:17 PM
 
Location: NC
1,946 posts, read 1,537,727 times
Reputation: 883

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7 View Post
More than just compromise, which can be good, a good negotiator can bring the other side to their side of the argument and help them see the problem and the solution from their point of view. Also, treating those with differing opinions with respect is essential to gaining their insight and getting a better result. I don't see a lot of that in Washington these days which is why it's like pulling teeth to get anything done. Some resistance is good to accomplish a better end result, but just obstinate gridlock because you can is not necessarily a good thing.
Or just flip-flop based on what position is most popular at the moment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-18-2011, 01:19 PM
 
8,758 posts, read 8,842,430 times
Reputation: 1428
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving_pains View Post
Or just flip-flop based on what position is most popular at the moment.


That has nothing to do with what I was describing but thanks for lowering the bar once again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2011, 01:38 PM
 
Location: Riverside
4,088 posts, read 3,678,734 times
Reputation: 3076
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
During the last Fox News Debate, the moderator asked a question related to the ability of a President to get people in both parties to compromise.

This is a question for voters in both parties. Everybody hates gridlock but do you really vote for a candidate because you think they'll be a good compromiser?

Personally, I think compromising is overrated. I used to really hate it when John McCain bragged about his aisle-crossing abilities when he ran in 2008. I kept thinking, we're not going to make you President so you can give away half the store if you win.

I liken it to a married couple. The husband wants to go to the movies to see the new big action-adventure. The wife wants to go to the movies to see the latest sob story chick flick. They compromise and go see the latest comedy, a movie neither one of them really wanted to see. They just compromised so they could do SOMETHING (prevent gridlock).

Isn't compromising the reason why we have such squishy half-a**ed laws or am I all wet on this?

I think "compromising" to some people means the other guys should give in and do what I want to do. That is, you only want to compromise when you aren't the party in power.

On a scale of 1 to 10:

With 10 being "compromise" is a quality that's very important to me in the presidential candidate I vote for

and

1 being "I don't want my candidate to compromise at all."

How do you rate the importance to you of your candidate's compromising ability?
You're scaring me here.

The principle that "Nobody gets everything they want" is what has allowed humans to co-exist in each other's vicinity since we were all hairy.

What do you want to replace it with? Brute strength That is the operating principle of cancer, and tyrants.

I equate the ability to skillfully negotiate compromises with "wisdom". And I rate it pretty high in a candidate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2011, 02:49 PM
 
Location: NC
1,946 posts, read 1,537,727 times
Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7 View Post
That has nothing to do with what I was describing but thanks for lowering the bar once again.
Romney has already lowered the bar for pandering to whoever is listening to his audience at that moment. If that isn't compromise, not sure what is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2011, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Chicago Area
8,006 posts, read 4,174,670 times
Reputation: 3016
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving_pains View Post
Romney has already lowered the bar for pandering to whoever is listening to his audience at that moment. If that isn't compromise, not sure what is.
Let's not forget that Romney isn't even the worst case of it. Rick Perry started his political career in a Democrat-heavy area running for the Texas House of Representatives. So ... he ran as a Democrat, party line and all. Then, when he changed to a new political job and being a Republican was more advantageous, he changed to that party line and all. If changing your opinion on key issues is a bad thing, Rick Perry shouldn't have one scrap of support left.

Gingrich is a walking contradiction. An amoral thug who stands for morals? Really? And of course his political career is LOADED with controversial acts. He has voted for and supported many of the same things that Romney gets hated on for, all in the name of compromise. But unlike Romney, he doesn't man up an admit it. Instead he lies and says he never did it.

It's a buzz word thing with Romney. Every one of the other mainline Republicans running has done much the same thing to varying degrees.

If consistency matters, there is only one decent choice: Ron Paul.

If you just can't bring yourself to support Ron Paul for whatever braindead reason, John Huntsman was easily your second best choice -- and look was the GOP voters did with that! They completely ignore their best candidates!

So after you've blacklisted the strongest two candidates, Huntsman and Paul, who is best of what's left? Romney, hands down. That's not saying he's Mr Wonderful exactly, but the remaining candidates SUCK.

Having said that, Mitt Romney is a vastly better choice than anyone gives him credit. If he is the eventual nominee, they the GOP stands a very good chance to unseat the all-time worst shop-a-holic president in US history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2011, 06:28 PM
 
Location: NC
1,946 posts, read 1,537,727 times
Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010 View Post
Let's not forget that Romney isn't even the worst case of it. Rick Perry started his political career in a Democrat-heavy area running for the Texas House of Representatives. So ... he ran as a Democrat, party line and all. Then, when he changed to a new political job and being a Republican was more advantageous, he changed to that party line and all. If changing your opinion on key issues is a bad thing, Rick Perry shouldn't have one scrap of support left.
I'm sorry, but being in the Republican party and stating that he was progressive in 2002 and saying that he is conservative in 2011 doesn't sound like a very conservative person.

If you want a comprehensive list of Mitten's flip-flops, see here:

Which Mitt? | Get To Know Mitt Romney

and/or here:

Mitt Romney Flip-Flops

and/or here:

Opinionated Fool: Thinking About Voting for Mitt Romney? Think Again.

and/or here:

Multiple Choice Mitt

Heck, he even flip-flops on the issue of flip-flops!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-19-2011, 11:46 PM
 
Location: Chicago Area
8,006 posts, read 4,174,670 times
Reputation: 3016
moving_pains it's really quite simple IMHO. Paul and Huntsman are the best choices. After that, Romney is the best of what's left.

Do you believe that Gingrich, Bachmann, Perry or Santorum are better candidates? Do you a better chance of beating Obama in the general election?

Our national debt is the single greatest factor devaluing the US dollar. The Fed prints more money because of our debt. Obama has been unbelievably irresponsible in raising our debt $6.5 trillion.

Ideally we get Ron Paul in the White House. But that failing, Romney is the right horse to bet on if you want to be sure that Obama gets booted out of the Oval Office. You have to figure that Americans just aren't bright enough to really take a serious look at Ron Paul yet. More of them this time than last and I'm doing my level best to stay optimistic, but what's Plan B? Vote for Obama? That'd be completely insane!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-19-2011, 11:54 PM
 
8,758 posts, read 8,842,430 times
Reputation: 1428
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010 View Post
Let's not forget that Romney isn't even the worst case of it. Rick Perry started his political career in a Democrat-heavy area running for the Texas House of Representatives. So ... he ran as a Democrat, party line and all. Then, when he changed to a new political job and being a Republican was more advantageous, he changed to that party line and all. If changing your opinion on key issues is a bad thing, Rick Perry shouldn't have one scrap of support left.

Gingrich is a walking contradiction. An amoral thug who stands for morals? Really? And of course his political career is LOADED with controversial acts. He has voted for and supported many of the same things that Romney gets hated on for, all in the name of compromise. But unlike Romney, he doesn't man up an admit it. Instead he lies and says he never did it.

It's a buzz word thing with Romney. Every one of the other mainline Republicans running has done much the same thing to varying degrees.

If consistency matters, there is only one decent choice: Ron Paul.

If you just can't bring yourself to support Ron Paul for whatever braindead reason, John Huntsman was easily your second best choice -- and look was the GOP voters did with that! They completely ignore their best candidates!

So after you've blacklisted the strongest two candidates, Huntsman and Paul, who is best of what's left? Romney, hands down. That's not saying he's Mr Wonderful exactly, but the remaining candidates SUCK.

Having said that, Mitt Romney is a vastly better choice than anyone gives him credit. If he is the eventual nominee, they the GOP stands a very good chance to unseat the all-time worst shop-a-holic president in US history.

Great post and something I have been trying to point out all along. Of course on here, it's like talking to the wall most days...lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-19-2011, 11:56 PM
 
8,758 posts, read 8,842,430 times
Reputation: 1428
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving_pains View Post
I'm sorry, but being in the Republican party and stating that he was progressive in 2002 and saying that he is conservative in 2011 doesn't sound like a very conservative person.

If you want a comprehensive list of Mitten's flip-flops, see here:

Which Mitt? | Get To Know Mitt Romney

and/or here:

Mitt Romney Flip-Flops

and/or here:

Opinionated Fool: Thinking About Voting for Mitt Romney? Think Again.

and/or here:

Multiple Choice Mitt

Heck, he even flip-flops on the issue of flip-flops!


Being "a progressive" and being "progressive" are two very different things. He said he was progressive...who isn't about one thing or another? It's semantics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2011, 04:51 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,121 posts, read 33,555,721 times
Reputation: 14136
I don't compromise on my values.

I would expect my guy, or gal, to be the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:55 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top