Politicians are ready to suspend their beliefs or policy positions in the name of electoral success. When belief collides with public opinion, belief often goes.
As for the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, [and] steel their emotions against decent human sympathy.
Donald Trump is at his very best, at his very best, when he talks about the issues.
Debate about the causes and consequences of climate change and the policy positions taken in response to it should be encouraged, not silenced.
I would ask Donald Trump why every single person in his cabinet has spoken out publicly - and his vice president - against gay rights, and he's never said anything about that.
The reason political party platforms are so long is that when you straddle anything it takes a long time to explain it.
Some people may not agree with me, that's their prerogative, but you would know clearly where Herman Cain stands on all of the issues, but more importantly where he stands on what we need to do in order to be able to get this nation moving in the direction we need to be moving.
The American people are a non-ideological people. They very much are looking for common-sense, practical solutions to the problems that they face. Oftentimes they've got contradictory senses of various issues and policy positions and I don't think that either the Republican Party or the Democratic Party necessarily capture their deepest dreams when those parties are described in caricature or in policy terms.
I think that Donald Trump is coming to this office with fewer set hard-and-fast policy prescriptions than a lot of other presidents might be arriving with.
What seems strange is that Obama elicits such extreme dislike when, in fact, he is an exemplary family man, and his policy positions would have made him a conventional liberal Republican not that long ago.
Obviously, I have certain policy positions that I push and advocate for that would benefit people dealing in a system that breeds inequality and makes life more difficult for people.
Political science has long tried to tackle a fundamental question of voter behavior: Do voters choose politicians because those politicians hold views that they like, or do voters choose policy positions because the politicians they like say those positions are correct?
I want to make one thing clear: I'm pro-choice, I'm pro-affirmative action, I'm pro- environment, pro-health care, and pro-labor. And if that ain't a Democrat, then I must be at the wrong meeting.
Joe Lieberman may be Moses on the stump, but when it comes to policies and votes, he boogies with the Golden Calf.
Know how your representatives stand on major national or state issues.
There's a line of thinking about Ted Cruz.
We oppose all corporate welfare, whether we benefit or not. You will find that our policy positions mainly hurt our profitability rather than help it.
If you liked Mick Mulvaney's votes, you'll like my votes.
If you start to catalog Hillary Clinton's positions between now and 2008, we're going to have a lot of conversations because there are a lot of places for her to go.
I believe, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, Bernie Sanders will be her most powerful and strongest supporter. No question. And he is going to take credit for positions that she's taken and she'll have to live with that.
One of the really positive things about minority government is that there is the necessity to broker policy positions. What happens is you get a hybrid of what a single party might do. And I don't think that is a bad thing.
Candidates [Hillary Clinton and Donald trump], we look forward to hearing you articulate your policies and your positions, as well as your visions and your values.
