Reply #86: This is a thoughtful topic for discussion.

[LWolf]

The whole issue of polarity and compromise, I mean. It all depends on how you spin it, or what perspective you view it from, I guess.

I think spending some time observing, thinking, and discussing from multiple perspectives is good for all of us.

I can do that without compromising the core of who I am and what I value. That's not the kind of compromise we need.

If "compromise" means "getting in line," "holding one's nose," etc. to effect a win for "our side," I don't think the job's been done. If we are addressing polarity, shouldn't we be looking at the bigger picture? Shouldn't we be letting go the polarizing elements and working with the "other" side? Ending the polarity between the two parties battling for power?

If it's all about Democratic Party loyalty, I can tell you that I'm not loyal. I vote for issues and individuals. The Democratic Party is only of value to me when they uphold those values and issues that make me who I am. My support is earned.

I can hear all the screeching now, so I'll have to add: that doesn't mean I'm not pragmatic when necessary. I'm a mass of contradictions. I think we ought to quit looking at the rest of the country as "the enemy" and look at us as one group when it comes to how we treat one another, speak about one another, etc.. I don't think hate does anything to reduce the polarity or invite collaboration. At the same time, I don't think I have to compromise myself to work with others. I think I can bring my perspective to the table, and we can work together, or not. If my perspective isn't welcome, then neither am I, and the group at the table doesn't need me for their agenda. No matter who that group may be.

How does all that play out during an election? I'm not going to campaign for people whose positions or records I don't like, no matter what party, or not, they belong to. I will focus my attentions on those who've earned them by working for what I'm working for. I voted today. How did that turn out?

I had a voting guide from my professional association; I voted my conscience, which means that I did not vote with them on every issue. I diverged on 2 out of 8 votes. I thought that was a pretty good level of agreement and cooperation.

When it comes to candidates, I didn't cast any vote for judges who were running unopposed. I knew nothing about them to make me want to vote for or against them, since they didn't campaign. On the non-partisan race for the state supreme court, I chose the woman over the man who has been prominent in republican politics in the past. The rest of my votes were all for Democrats. Most because I honestly support their work. In the race for governor, I compromised. I voted for a democrat I'm not crazy about instead of a better 3rd party candidate, because the republican alternative, who looks pretty good in the polls, is a horror. I hope the D wins for that reason, even though I figure I'll the voice of opposition should he win. I think that's good enough. I simply will not dress and gush like a cheerleader and lie about how incredible he is if I don't think so, and I won't lie about why he got my vote.

If we can come together to agree on half of the issues before us, isn't that better than none? That's the kind of work I'm willing to do. Not a giving up on positions I feel are correct, but a meeting and collaborating where some level of agreement is possible; using the commonalities and areas of agreement as a starting point.