Show of HandsShow of Hands

zuko November 1st, 2014 1:26pm

When you hear the term "reach across the aisle", do you think of a person who will work tirelessly to convince the opposition of the correctness of his/her position or someone willing to compromise his/her stance to attract votes from the opposition?

17 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Zod Above Pugetropolis
11/02/14 11:42 am

Someone who puts protecting equality and individual rights, then the needs, and then the wants of the majority, in that order, above what is best for him or his party politically. He would compromise on all but protecting equality and rights.

zuko on deck
11/02/14 12:31 pm

I think that is very well said. For me, though, if you replaced the word "equality" with "liberty", I would agree. Thanks for your input on these questions, BTW. I always appreciate your insight.

AbandonedAccnt Not here.
11/02/14 10:31 am

No one reaches across the aisle except to advance his own agenda. Occasionally agendas do align and this is when it happens. Everything else is just politics as usual. Democrat claims to be aisle reachers is just partisan nonsense.

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
11/02/14 5:55 pm

As are Republican claims to reach across.

AbandonedAccnt Not here.
11/02/14 5:59 pm

Repubs don't feign bipartisanship like the dems do. They're the party of "no," remember?

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
11/02/14 7:19 pm

Don't be so modest. Republican Candidates routinely claim to be willing to "reach across the aisle" and "work with" their colleagues. It's bad form to give the Democrats all the credit.

AbandonedAccnt Not here.
11/03/14 4:44 am

I'm not a republican. I'm a outside observer just stating my observations.

Archdude Payson, AZ
11/02/14 9:57 am

The tone of your question/answers denigrates constructive compromise. That's unfortunate since it is the way to move beyond destructive gridlock.

zuko on deck
11/02/14 11:03 am

I tried to ask in a neutral tone. Is there another definition, or another way I could have asked? I'm trying to get as unbiased opinions as I can. Thanks for your help and contributing to the discussion!

Archdude Payson, AZ
11/02/14 11:28 am

Great, I appreciate the thought. I guess I would have put a positive modifier on compromiser just as you did on holding one's principles.

zuko on deck
11/02/14 11:54 am

Yes. That's funny, though. I was concerned the other sounded too negative! That's why I added that qualifier. The character limit gets in the way sometimes, too. Thanks, again for your input. Always interested in ways to make my polls better.

brenstal Florida
11/02/14 1:12 am

Compromise, but in a way where both sides can get something from the legislation. I'd rather have an effective government with elements to legislation that I disagree with than the gridlock ideological grandstanding we have.

Reply
brenstal Florida
11/02/14 1:15 am

I think legislators who are completely unwilling to compromise and who can't even do small things (like passing presidential appointments) are really hurting our ability to function as a country.

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
11/02/14 12:32 am

I think it's someone who is a little of both.

Reply
FacePalm That Trick Never Works
11/02/14 12:35 am

I prefer someone who is more concerned about getting a job done to the best of Everyone (or as many as possible). Rather than a zealot who is so tied to "a principle" that they are incapable of finding solutions to problems.

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
11/01/14 11:34 am

I think of someone willing to compromise his principles in order to get a small bit of legislation done. That's why I don't like this idea. Principles shouldn't be compromised.

Reply
TierasPet
11/01/14 6:48 am

I think of compromise. I know that's not always the case but I think it usually is what they are trying to do.

Reply
zuko on deck
11/01/14 7:00 am

Do you tend to vote for people who are willing to compromise on their stances in order to pass legislation, or would you rather they stand firm on their beliefs? Do you vote more on the stance or the willingness to compromise that stance?

TierasPet
11/01/14 7:17 am

It depends on the issue. Most major political issues must involve compromise for resolution. I vote based on people's ability to move off an extreme stance and into a more moderate one. Extremes cause gridlock.