What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Eddie Teach]

It's easy to claim you're willing to compromise and then refuse to make meaningful concessions. Without a deal, you never have to prove it.

[Razgovory]

It's been a while since either side was willing to compromise.

That is simply not remotely true, and is self evidently not true.

opposition to every GOP SC pick going back 30 years

This is bullshit.

[Eddie Teach]

Ok, not David Souter.

[bogh]

It's easy to claim you're willing to compromise and then refuse to make meaningful concessions. Without a deal, you never have to prove it.

So the unless you are willing to completely surrounded to the unbending opposition, you're unwilling to compromise? In a world of zero information that might be a reasonable assertion. In the real world with observable behavior and opinions from both sides it is clearly not.

[Razgovory]

Ok, not David Souter.

Or John Roberts.

But you know "both sides!"

[DGuller]

Is there a term for "both sides" extremist, the kind of extremist that would say "it takes two to tango" even in the case of Nazis v. Jews?  I've never encountered a good concise one.  I've encountered a number of such people in recent years; some are just conservatives who don't dare to speak their mind, but some are legitimately pathologically allergic to any black and white conclusion.

[Eddie Teach]

It's easy to claim you're willing to compromise and then refuse to make meaningful concessions. Without a deal, you never have to prove it.

So the unless you are willing to completely surrounded to the unbending opposition, you're unwilling to compromise? In a world of zero information that might be a reasonable assertion. In the real world with observable behavior and opinions from both sides it is clearly not.

In the real world, both sides think they are giving away the farm. You sympathize with the Democrats so any concessions they make seem huge and any Republican demands unreasonable. The reverse is true for people like my mother or father(r.i.p.).

[Eddie Teach]

Is there a term for "both sides" extremist, the kind of extremist that would say "it takes two to tango" even in the case of Nazis v. Jews?  I've never encountered a good concise one.  I've encountered a number of such people in recent years; some are just conservatives who don't dare to speak their mind, but some are legitimately pathologically allergic to any black and white conclusion.

Clearly you don't mean me, since I am Team Jew all the way.

[grumbler]

Twenty-two Democratic Senators were willing to vote for Roberts.  Only nine Republican were willing to vote for Sotomayor and only five for Kagan.  Not one Republican was willing to vote for Merrick Garland.  Not a single one, even in committee.  It is laughable to assert that those represent an equal unwillingness to compromise.

[Camerus]

And a whopping 3 Democrats voted for Gorsuch.

[DGuller]

Is there a term for "both sides" extremist, the kind of extremist that would say "it takes two to tango" even in the case of Nazis v. Jews?  I've never encountered a good concise one.  I've encountered a number of such people in recent years; some are just conservatives who don't dare to speak their mind, but some are legitimately pathologically allergic to any black and white conclusion.

Clearly you don't mean me, since I am Team Jew all the way.

That was not a veiled attack on anyone, I'm asking a general question.  We have terms for right-wing and left-wing radicals, but I think another important piece to the breakdown of compromise are the radical "two-siders".  Their unwillingness to pass meaningful judgment let the right-wing radicals off the hook and free to go further and further to the extremes, for the most part.

[grumbler]

And a whopping 3 Democrats voted for Gorsuch.

Yeah, well, eventually obstructionism is going to see a reaction.  Still, three is more than zero.

[Eddie Teach]

This really seems like a difference in degree(perhaps, haven't looked up any of the confirmations that haven't been mentioned) rather than kind.

[Berkut]

It's been a while since either side was willing to compromise.

That is simply not remotely true, and is self evidently not true.

No wall, no Democrat votes on successful tax bill or failed Obama care overhaul, opposition to every GOP SC pick going back 30 years... Heck, wasn't there a government shutdown over a few hundred million dollars to Planned Parenthood?

Anyway, when there is no successful agreement, it rings hollow to say your side is willing to compromise but the other side wasn't. And there haven't been any major compromises in over a decade.

There has not been any attempt to "overhaul" Obama care. Just a lot of successful attempts to sabotage it outright.

No wall? Are you kidding me? That is how you measure "compromise"?

[Razgovory]

Let's do a compromise wall, meet them half way.  We build the wall, but it's only three feet high.  Wait why are we even discussing the wall.  Mexico is going to pay for it.  Soon as that check clears we start construction.