I'm used to politics at an international level: people put together an argument and, even if you vehemently disagree with them, well, you can recognise it's an argument and respond.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The difficult part in an argument is not to defend one's opinion but rather to know it.
I went into politics thinking that, if I made arguments in good faith, I'd get a hearing. It's a reasonable assumption, but it's wrong. In five and a half years in politics up north, no one really bothered to criticize my ideas, such as they were. It was never my message that was the issue. It was always the messenger.
If you disagree with me about a position I have taken, or what I've done, tell me, argue with me, debate. Sometimes, right and good are not that clear; at other times, it is only deliberate and respectful debate that leads us to understand what road we should take.
You have to be able to interact with people whose politics you disagree with.
If I'm in a political argument, I think I can, with reasonable accuracy and without boasting, put the other person's side of the case at least as well as they could. One has to be able to say that in any well-conducted argument.
Arguments only confirm people in their own opinions.
If a person can be said to have the wrong attitude, there is no need to pay attention to his arguments.
The only part of an argument that really matters is what we think of the people arguing.
I don't think anyone would describe me as an understated advocate. Several people have told me my argument style is very direct and very blunt, which I find mystifying. How could you ever be anything but direct and blunt?
I love argument, I love debate. I don't expect anyone just to sit there and agree with me, that's not their job.