The compromise will always be more expensive than either of the suggestions it is compromising.
It was a remarkably reasonable compromise. It pleased nobody, but everybody signed on.
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.
Nearly all legislation is the result of compromise.
See Henry Clay for an earlier expression of this point.
Compromise, contrary to popular opinion, does not mean selling out one's principles. Compromise means working out differences to forge a solution which fits the diversity of the body politic.
All legislation of any consequence is a compromise. You have to recognize that.
Compromises make all of us swallow hard.
Compromise used to mean that half a loaf was better than no loaf. Among modern statesmen it really seems to mean that half a loaf is better than a full loaf.
Compromise is a process that seeks the path of least resistance. By its very nature, then, rarely will any idea of value be born as a result. A solution by compromise is, almost always, mediocre.
If you start with a compromise, you live with a compromise for a long time.
This product is a compromise, and the nature of compromise is that you don't get everything you want.
'Compromise' isn't supposed to be a dirty word. It is, in fact, how representative democracy works.
Compromise disappoints those who buy into the most ambitious and simplistic populist slogans.