[mistercow]

The problem is that people almost never apply the same reasoning to political issues as they do to non-political questions of fact. There are too many tribal issues in the way, and constructing believable arguments is often more advantageous in a tribal society than being right. See http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/

So you might be able to arrive at a consensus on first principles, but that doesn't mean anybody will update their beliefs. They'll just come up with new reasons to believe them.

[einhverfr]

It doesn't have to be a consensus. The point though is that with some common ground we can talk about issues and over time this can help people evolve their beliefs on both sides.

The problem with the political tribalism is that since we believe we have very little in common we ally ourselves with those who do not share our interests on the basis of manufactured agreement. I think it is only once one can attack that process that we can come together to update beliefs.

I consider myself fairly far right of center (not in a tea-party way, in a Distributist way). One of the most useful things i have found is that if I start off with a critique of the right, I can often get the left to listen to me on the rest.