A Quote by Sharad Pawar

I have always believed in cordial relationship with political parties and their leaders. — © Sharad Pawar
I have always believed in cordial relationship with political parties and their leaders.
See in old days, there were only two parties nationally, Congress and BJP... Now there are regional leaders. Time has come to pick up regional leaders in these national parties and build political campaign around them who can challenge regional parties.
Real political issues cannot be manufactured by the leaders of political parties, and real ones cannot be evaded by political parties. The real political issues of the day declare themselves, and come out of the depths of that deep which we call public opinion.
I've always had a very cordial relationship with Kobe.
Elections in India are not contests between personalities. They are ultimately battles involving political parties; promises and pledges that political parties make; the vision and programmes that political parties bring to the table. So although, Modi's style is 'I, me, myself,' I don't think 2014 elections as a Modi versus Rahul contest.
A few years ago the idea that extreme poverty was harmful was on the fringes of the economic and political debate. But having made the case we are now seeing an emerging consensus among business leaders, economic leaders, political leaders and even faith leaders.
What makes me worry today is the alarming decline in the trust in democratic institutions - political parties, Parliaments, political leaders. Less and less people are going to the polls in most advanced democracies.
For the last 20 years, political parties have had a one-way relationship with youth - of exploiting them for political gains and denying them their dues.
The euro zone was driven by the neoliberal view that markets are always efficient. That in itself is political. There was no pressing economic need that the euro was required to solve, but leaders believed that it would foster growth.
I have worked with Chuck Grassley off and on through the years, and always had what I considered and what I think he'd consider a cordial working relationship.
I think frustration unfortunately, reflects a real breakdown in the political parties themselves, which is fascinating because our constitution did not anticipate political parties. They're not even written in the Constitution, there's no guidelines. When we look at the arcane processes of delegate selection in the primaries and caucuses, it's not in the Constitution. This is all created post Constitution. And yet I think we're in the middle of tensions between and within the political parties. They're not functioning that well.
I have always believed that on important issues, the leaders must lead. Where the leaders fail to lead, and people are really concerned about it, the people will take the lead and make the leaders follow.
First of all, there's no mention of political parties in the Constitution, so you begin American history with not only no political conventions but also no parties.
Leaders of organisations, political parties and large businesses frequently fail to talk in a straight and entirely truthful fashion.
But political parties must claim to be radically different from one another, and political journalism must play along, or else why exist? So the Liberals and Tories concentrate on what does distinguish them: their leaders. That in itself just about guarantees a campaign of ad hominem gooning.
Growing up in Egypt, I never saw the country as divided as it is today. We now have two main political groupings: the Islamist parties and the civil, or liberal, political parties.
We also call upon the king to hand over power to the political parties and for the political parties to shoulder their responsibility and turn the people's demands for democracy and good governance into reality.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!