Campbell Brown Quotes

My definition of bipartisanship is Democrats agreeing with Republicans

When you hang the 'bipartisan' tag on something, the perception is that differences have been worked out, and there's a broad agreement that that's the way forward.

I sure tried to help deliver compromise, consensus, bipartisanship.

I think if you're going to get anything done in the Senate, you have to be on the same sheet of music. If you don't get people on the same sheet of music it comes out pretty horrible.

I am a Republican who is prepared to compromise—and contrary to the current misconceptions, compromise is not a capitulation of one’s principles

We cannot agree on everything but we must agree on the framework.

We have to get back to a government where leaders are willing to talk across party lines and do not have absolute politics as the goal.

If the parties get too close together they lose their identities, if they get too far apart you're not going to get a whole lot done because you almost always need to have some folks on the other side of the aisle to accomplish anything.

Compromise works well in this world when you have shared goals.

I have a mindset that says bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view.

Bipartisanship may be abnormal, but it does occur. The challenge is to explain why it occurs at all, and why it never lasts.

This is good government. We have divided government. To make divided government work you can’t ask each other to compromise core principles…. We ask each other to find common ground for the common good.

You need people that are willing to talk to the other side, or you're never going to get anything done. You need to be willing to expand your ground. There's always usually a place on issues where you can find common ground.

Good governance requires working toward common ground. It isn't easy.

When everybody goes into their separate corners, it's just real easy to demonize the other side instead of saying, 'Okay, how can we come together and figure out how to get done what's important for the country?'

If politicians of both parties would spend more time legislating and less time attacking each other, we would all be better off.

The idea that two political parties can't come together to get a mission done is foreign to me - and unacceptable.

It used to be that Democrats and Republicans would disagree, but they could be social to each other. There were times during the year that we acted together in the good of the country.

Passionately defending one's principles is crucial. Representing your district is fundamental. But refusing to entertain the common ground - with no other cost but giving the other guy a political 'win' - is a disservice.

While I have worked hard to bring folks to the middle to craft common-sense solutions to the many problems that confront our nation, Washington is mired in gridlock, gamesmanship and constant partisan bickering.

We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on when it's necessary to compromise.

So the - the part of the problem is not just the rhetoric. It's the fact that we - we're so polarized in what we've done to each other as parties over the last thirty years in redistricting that it's very, very hard to overcome your own constituencies and move to the middle.

I did look for compromise. I worked in a bipartisan way.

I hate the fact that people think 'compromise' is a dirty word.

Partisan rancour and party politics and ideology have got in the way of compromise - and compromise is the only thing that has ever made politics successful.