http://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/...the-middle

"...When it comes to immigration, the public also is at a far more sensible place than most politicians. The voters are squarely behind offering work permits and even a path to citizenship to DACA recipients and others here illegally, as long as we do whatever it takes to fix the problem of border security to stop people from coming in on an unregulated basis and to limit chain migration and lotteries. Less than one-third support closing down ICE, and the data makes you wonder what could be behind the left’s new rallying cry, given its very limited support...."

I don't really see the polls that support all of this that Clinton's pollster sees. But he suggests not looking to the fringes of the parties.



https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...37517.html

"...Can our leaders in Congress be inspired, or shamed, into working together? The existing power structures in both the Democratic and Republican leadership have long been able to resist it, but those are breaking up. Rep. Paul Ryan is retiring and Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi will not be speaker either. New hierarchies will form and, with them, new opportunities to change the way Congress works. Partisanship won’t disappear but a far more closely divided House next year will force one of two paths for leaders -- paralysis or problem solving. While much could change, if Republicans ultimately hold their majority they will likely have fewer seats. If Democrats take the House back they aren’t likely to pick up many more than the 23 seats required to flip control. No speaker has control with a five- or seven-seat majority...."

Article suggests rule changes within the House to make compromise across party lines more likely and to enable the "problem solvers" group within the House.


There are some problems that need to be solved on a bi-partisan basis. Medicare, Social Security, Health care. We need a consensus on defense. I'm not sure that we need to go there on everything.