Raising the level of the discourse.

Most people would agree that partisan politics does not serve the public well.

Imagine a continuum has been drawn on every important political issue. They are laid out side by side, liberal to the left and conservative to the right. On every continuum, every stakeholder has placed their mark according to their feelings on each issue.

Concepts would become apparent.

• On each continuum, there are stakeholders spread over the entire continuum.
• Likely, they are distributed along a sign curve; few on the far ends, most clumped around a single position.
• A line drawn through the peaks will not be a straight line. People are more conservative than liberal on some issues, and more liberal than conservative on others.

Everything we read, is about somebody's opinion about where other people can be attached to the "average"continuum. Even though there is no meaningful such thing.

We are not reading clear statement of the problems, and an accurate statements of each individual's solution.

Voters should establish their own set of continua, draw a line through candidates' positions on each issue, and then vote for the person who line is closest to their own.

What would happen if nobody used names to talk politics for a while?

What would happen if we looked at individuals and their individual approaches to solving real problems?

Wouldn't the level of the discourse climb a notch or two?