Letter to the editor: In politics, compromise is possible | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: In politics, compromise is possible

The divisiveness at the federal level is stigmatized as the “worst ever,” “unprecedented” and “without comparison,” to cite just a few epithets. Good rhetoric. Grabs viewers. Raises partisan money. But untrue.

There has never been a “golden age” of politics, and in fact the current level of acrimony is historically mild and redundant. It has been much worse, but I will spare you the history lesson.

Personal attacks have been the norm, although we have not experienced the current heat for quite some time, owing largely to a well-financed partisan divide, the aforementioned drive to perpetuate division on the part of the media and the Wild West frontier of social media platforms like Twitter.

However, when diametrically opposed entities battle it out to the eventual conclusion, we, the public, are the winners. Once they have achieved a compromise, they will have pared down each other’s demands. That is politics, pure and simple.

The end result will be a win/win situation, which defines compromise. But through the lens of the media, no compromise is foreseeable, or even possible. We are being manipulated into believing that this is a zero-sum game; in order to win big, someone has to lose big.

Send money to the PAC of your choice so we can run the table. Meanwhile, back in the chambers, the elected lords and ladies achieve nothing of value for us.

The takeaway is simple: If you want this dogfight to end, don’t feed the dogs.

Don Scott

Mt. Pleasant Township


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.