I may be in the minority here...but I think it is more than obvious that the American people are hungry for leadership. Effectively telling your base, I am with you....but I will "reach across the aisles" fifty, sixty, seventy percent (or more) of the time is not leadership. A middle-school kid could do that. Perhaps no Republican was ever better at "compromise" than Bush 43. Look where it got him....and now, the Republican Party.

My answer to this, were I elected President? Nothing.
While I agree- and have said this in previous reviews-that blind party loyalty is gravely damaging this nation, I reject the notion that the right/left paradigm is a bad thing.
We have reached a sort of breaking point here in the United States with two views of the future, two views of right and wrong. On most levels, these views are diametrically opposed.
The left believes that it is the job of the federal government to right all wrongs, and that the government does it better than the private sector. They believe in the Constitution so long as it suits their agenda. When it doesn’t, then the Constitution is “a living, breathing document”, a.k.a., a slight obstacle. If that fails, they believe they can always count on leftist judicial activism to forward the cause du jour. They believe that non-US citizens should have Constitutional protections, even if they are proven terrorists; but that American Christians should be forced into the closet. They believe that the military is little more than a dumping ground for uneducated, societal rejects. They believe it is okay to kill a baby in the womb, but that smoking a cigarette is an abomination.
On the list goes.
The right- the real right…true conservatives- believe the opposite of the above.
The political left has its representation via the Democrat Party, while the political right has been bastardized, the Republican Party having been hijacked by the neocon, blueblood wing.
And so, the battle continues. This is a battle for the heart and soul, the very definition of our nation for generations to come.
Anyone here who knows me knows where I come down on this. I will not join the “can’t we all just get along” crowd. The definition of getting along with the left is basically to sit down, shut up, and give them everything they want.
If this nation ever again has a leader- someone who will place emphasis on the Constitution, not on scoring points for a party- we may get back on track.

Polarization is occurring because there is a duopoly in the public discourse: either you're a Republican or a Democrat, a liberal or a conservative. Such a dynamic begs for extreme disharmony, and when you have a 24 hour news cycle stoking the flames, even more so. Confrontation brings viewers to the news channels, and editors know it and encourage it.

There is a cultural component to this as well, as values are have been shifting in recent years, thus focusing the debate into places that were not really up for discussion 50 years ago.

In order to reduce the polarization and focus the debate on pertinent issues, I believe that we need to get around this foolish left-right debate that ignores critical issues facing the country today and highlights those that that are not so important. The discussion needs to be lifted to a higher plane than the trench warfare of obsolete values and policies that are hampering any type of forward progress.

Strong third and even fourth party movements have in the past forced the two major parties to focus their attention outside their scope of operations. I believe that we would benefit greatly from the entry of new voices into the marketplace of ideas. This would reset the political debate and force the two parties to start discussing new issues and solutions outside the same hackneyed and failed proposals they've been pushing for years.

The issues facing the country today are so critical, yet I believe the discourse is focusing too much on mundane issues that are not strategically important in the long term.

In short, there's a lot that we can all agree upon, but these distinctions between liberal and conservative seem to hinder any type of constructive discourse that leads to definitive conclusions about the nature of our political system. These ideological labels create a false sense of choice that does not really explain effectively the reality of politics.

Assuming O'bama continues to behave the way he has ever since he entered the political arena, he'll ignore most of the partisan and personal crap, and get down to the business of taking care of #1, enriching his corporate  sponsors, and attempting to ease the plight of the average American so the ruling class can rest assured there won't be an insurrection during his term.

All this is of course based on the shaky assumption O'Bama wins and lives to govern.

Sorry, but one word is going to keep me from being serious on this one. You have to kill the rancor like Luke Skywalker did. Let's see Barry try that one...

He will reduce partisan rhetoric by 25% in his first 100 days in office and will move on to provide incentive programs aimed at increasing courtesy levels in the national debate.  During the first State of the Union address he will make hand gestures in an encouraging motion to the members of both parties in the chamber and will invite Barbara Bush over for tea next spring.  He will also grant the wishes of every child who asks for a unicorn or a chimpanzee next Christmas.

The one thing I've noticed is that in the last ten years, with the internet, and the information people can access, it's gotten way more partisan. Oh he'll talk a good game about this, but he will not, nor can not lower the level of rancor in political discourse. those days are long gone ,and if the Dems increase their majority's, that would prevent G.O.P filibusters, its gonna go to a whole new level.

The best answer to this question, of course, would be "Get rid of the Republicans."  You'd think with the serious mess McCain's party, the GOP, has put this country, you'd think that the imbecilic sheep supporting him would feel chagrined, and somewhat ashamed, that their voting Republican has been a major contributing factor to the peril we're in, and stow it already.  But, no.  The droolers are out en masse, resorting to the typical and really tiresome antics of fear and smear, lies and exaggerations, character assassinations and throwing around meaningless labels like they were pennies.  The lefties and political midgrounders have been patiently bearing this nonsense, as usual, yet are mindful that in a week these ignorant, reckless and childish douchebags will be silenced by public mandate.  And, if they insist on continuing to be disruptive and uncooperative, causing trouble for the rest of us after the election, well, at that point they will have to be considered enemies of America, and dwelt with accordingly.  Get the nooses ready.

None.  It's not the winner's problem to comfort the losing party.  And this isn't a partisian issue.  Usually (but not always) a new president may or may not have to work with the other party depending on multiple factors- but I for one don't think much of having to 'lower' the level of 'rancor' - do your job, make the tough decisions, and work with advisors, advice, science, and instinct. . .

OBVIOUSLY LEAVE THE FRUITLOOPS HERE AND MOVE TO CANADA - CANADIANS ARE POLITE AND DONT OFFEND ANYONE -- RIGHT ANDY?

In 2000, George W. Bush promised to reach across party lines to democrats and "change the tone" in Washington.  The tone changed alright but, this might have been his greatest, among many resounding failures.  Has Obama made any overtures toward reconciling with the opposition, if he wins?