If we had to solve political problems, how would we talk differently?

As political discussions go, fluther doesn’t allow things to get personal, and that takes a lot of heat out of the conversations. Even so, I know that I will often say things very much more strongly just for rhetorical effect. I think a strong statement is more likely to get people to agree.

However, if I were trying to solve a problem, say as a politician or as a mediator between various business organizations, I would speak much more moderately. I would lose a lot of the rhetoric. I would spend more time trying to understand my opponents.

I don’t think Congress is any different. I think that a lot of people don’t care about solving problems. They are the ones with all the vehement rhetoric. The ones who are really trying to work, I think, take a much quieter stance.

I don’t know if it works, but what’s your perception on your behavior here. Do you mouth off? Do you pull your punches? If you had responsibility for actually solving problems, how would that affect your public stance on the issues?