Top 1200 Agree To Disagree Quotes & Sayings - Page 3

My attempt is to try to broaden the base of the Republican Party, to try to bring in people that can agree and that can disagree on that, because I think the issues that we face about terrorism, about our economy, about the growth of our economy are so important that we have to have the biggest outreach possible.

I think the best of us comes when we are working together collectively. And it doesn't mean that we can't disagree. We've got to learn, as Dad taught us, to disagree without being disagreeable.

We need a government, not politics. Because there's too much politics. Of course there should be debate. But there seems to be so much pettiness and not enough good faith. It is civilized to agree to disagree, and this idea is slowly disintegrating. The great statesmen of the past knew this, and I think it helps drive civilization.

I agree some people are biased, and I agree that they exist in a world of pure, sheer, raw hatred for anything they don't agree with, but I do believe they're also ignorant. I think they're dumb as skunks. I don't think they've been educated. They haven't the ability to hear and listen to common sense and understand what it is.

Gary Bauer has done great things, ... I want to promise you again, you may agree with me, you may disagree with me, but I will do great things.

With Mobb Deep, we have to agree on things. We have to agree that we want to use that beat or agree on the type of song we want to do.

I've never written a song that's hopeless. I'm not a hopeless person. I'm crazily optimistic. I crazily see the good in people. I crazily see the way out of a terrible situation. I crazily try to be the diplomat. If there are two warring factions in my life, I want them to agree to disagree at the very least.

I mean, you can agree or disagree with Iraq or Afghanistan, but by the way, now the great campaigning cause out there is the absence of intervention in Syria. And then in Libya, it's partial intervention. And that doesn't really explain why some countries that have literally nothing to do with the interventions in the Middle East end up getting targeted.

We all agree on the core values of a free and open Internet. We simply may disagree on the appropriate regulatory framework for securing those values. And I would much rather have an open and honest debate about the appropriate regulatory framework as opposed to throwing misinformation out there to achieve political ends.

I don't agree that everyone should agree with everyone's lifestyle. I think that some people aren't going to agree, but I think that when you're mean and when you ridicule people it's a sign of your own insecurities.

I don't have the faith now. I certainly believe in Jesus - you know, that he existed and he was a very nice man. And who can disagree with a simple philosophy of treat other people like you'd like to be treated yourself? It's absolutely - nothing I can disagree with that.

I also think it's important for us to hold our elected officials accountable and part of how you do that is simple, call them and let them know when you agree or disagree with what their decisions are and suggest how they should come out on certain legislation that important to you.

Good people can disagree - all you want is honesty, because you know, if I disagree, I'm willing to debate you on that, and then let the public decide what's good policy and bad policy.

I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "We are Americans and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration!"

It's fine to talk about politics with people you agree with. But it is rude to argue about politics with people you disagree with. Political discourse becomes isolated, and isolated discourse becomes more extreme.

If you disagree, you disagree. But you've got to move on.

To be a vegetarian is to disagree - to disagree with the course of things today... starvation, cruelty - we must make a statement against these things. Vegetarianism is my statement. And I think it's a strong one.

Trump is popular, Trump is big precisely because Republican voters are angry at establishment Republicans. And establishment Republicans keep giving these people reason to be mad by continuing to insult them, and by appearing to agree with Democrats on key issues a majority of Americans disagree with, from amnesty to whatever, economics, Obamacare, take your pick.

Disagree with someone on the right and he is likely to think you obtuse, wrong, foolish, a dope. Disagree with someone on the left, and he is more likely to think you selfish, a sell-out, insensitive, possibly evil.

There are people out there who disagree with me politically, and understand the limits of that disagreement. It doesn't mean we disagree as people on basic human needs.

I'm starting to be a lot more comfortable with allowing people to decide for themselves and almost creating a situation that forces people to decide for themselves whether they like it or don't like it or agree with the character or disagree with the character.

You agree - I'm sure you agree that beauty is the only thing worth living for.

When the conversation started to move to the things that we disagreed on, Donald Trump moved it back to the things that we could agree on. I think that's the way you get deals done, right? You and I might disagree 80% of the time but that still gives us 20% opportunity to try to work things out.

It gets to be a problem when I decide one position should be the law for everybody. In public life, we [people] have to find a way to live together even though we disagree - and some things we will never agree on. But we've got to leave this I'm-going-to-kill-you-because-you-don't-believe-what-I-believe attitude behind.

Whether you agree or disagree with privatization, two things are obvious. First, taxpayers need to be asking more and better questions before handing over control of critical public assets like a highway, an airport, or a parking meter concession. And second, Uncle Sam is being played for a sucker.

One of the terrible things about George W. Bush Administration is that nobody wants to hear bad news. The neoconservatives are a small circle, and they're all sort of holding hands as they develop their policy, and outsiders aren't allowed. If you agree with the guys on the inside, you're a genius. If you disagree, you're a traitor, a pariah, you're an apostate, and you're not allowed in.

Some have said that the thesis [of indeterminacy] is a consequence of my behaviorism. Some have said that it is a reductio ad absurdum of my behaviorism. I disagree with this second point, but I agree with the first. I hold further that the behaviorism approach is mandatory. In psychology one may or may not be a behaviorist, but in linguistics one has no choice.

I don't disagree with anything I've ever said. Why in God's name would I disagree with something I've said?

If you must hate a man for the many things about which you disagree, remember that you should also love him for the many things about which you agree.

I still agree with the invasion of Iraq. I don't agree with most of the decisions that accompanied it.

I mean, you know, this idea that somebody we disagree with on economic or social policy or something we have to turn into some kind of ogre or demon, I think, is a mistake. I mean, it's like telling the American people or half the American people that don't agree with you they're all fools. That's just not true.

I'm manifestly not the same as Alex Salmond. I'm a different gender, for example... I'm being flippant, but maybe this is a partly gender-driven difference: I'm very keen that we find a way of reaching out across party divides to find things we agree on, as well as the things we disagree on.

Any time scientists disagree, it's because we have insufficient data. Then we can agree on what kind of data to get; we get the data; and the data solves the problem. Either I'm right, or you're right, or we're both wrong. And we move on. That kind of conflict resolution does not exist in politics or religion.

The more one studies the harmony of music, and then studies human nature, how people agree and how they disagree, how there is attraction and repulsion, the more one will see that it is all music.

The people to fear are not those who disagree with you, but those who disagree with you and are too cowardly to let you know.

I think sometimes when children grow up, their parents grow up. Mine grew up with me. We coexist. I don't try to change them anymore, and I don't think they try to change me. We agree to disagree.

Few generals were as brilliant as Robert E. Lee and few battles as titanic -- and puzzling -- as Gettysburg. Why did Lee fail? In Lost Triumph, Tom Carhart offers a bold and provocative new assessment. Agree or disagree, it is sure to stimulate debate among even the most seasoned Civil War buffs.

If, two people have good minds and they're looking at problems, if they agree all the time it means one of them is not thinking. If they disagree all the time, it means one of them is not thinking. They're just allowing their political position to dictate their position on an issue. And I think that's unhealthy. And the public knows better.

If you disagree with your government, that's political. If you disagree with your government that is approaching theocracy, then you're evil.

Ford is leaving. You see that, their small car division leaving. Thousands of jobs leaving Michigan, leaving Ohio. They're all leaving. And we can't allow it to happen anymore.As far as child care is concerned and so many other things, I think Hillary Clinton and I agree on that. We probably disagree a little bit as to numbers and amounts and what we're going to do, but perhaps we'll be talking about that later.

Anyone interested in the past, present, or future of banking and financial crises should read The Bankers' New Clothes. Admati and Hellwig provide a forceful and accessible analysis of the recent financial crisis and offer proposals to prevent future financial failures. While controversial, these proposals--whether you agree or disagree with them--will force you to think through the problems and solutions.

A politician is a person with whose politics you don't agree; if you agree with him he's a statesman.

If we can't agree on objective truth, then how are we ever going to agree on opinions?

It's a good question, because a movie isn't good or bad based on its politics. It's usually good or bad for other reasons, though you might agree or disagree with its politics.

The United States has some people in Europe with whom we disagree on this matter and a large number of people in Europe, including governments in Europe, with whom we agree.

Ted Cruz is a patriot. He believes in what he does. He's done marvels in mobilizing conservatives, mobilizing Americans concerned about the direction of the ever-expanding entitlement state under Obama, and particularly the threat it is to freedom. I disagree with his tactics, but I agree entirely with his objectives.

I think it is important for me to speak out on social issues. Sometimes people will agree with me. Sometimes people will disagree with me. I don't take that personally.

I think, overwhelmingly, Americans would agree that if you're going to come into our country, you have to accept the fact that people are allowed to practice different faiths and lifestyles, without fear of violence, without fear of being literally oppressed or subjugated. I don't think that's something any reasonable person would disagree with.

If you throw one stone, it’s a punishable offence. If 1,000 stones are thrown, it’s political action. If you set a car on fire, it’s a punishable offence. If hundreds of cars are set on fire, it’s political action. Protest is when I say I don’t agree with something. Resistance is when I ensure that things with which I disagree no longer take place.

I disagree with a lot of things, but hey, what a person does is between them and their maker. I can disagree with somebody, and I can still be friends with them.

I always have this red nose in my pocket, and if it looks like I'm taking things too seriously, or the person I'm talking to is taking them too seriously, I put the nose on. It doesn't matter what we're doing or talking about, it doesn't matter if we agree or disagree, the nose changes everything.

We only now talk to our own, on Facebook and social media we talk to people, we friend and we like and we follow people who agree with us and rather than engaging with people who disagree with us, we unfollow them, we block them, we non-platform them.

Football is a violent sport, but you know what you sign up for when you put those shoulder pads on. I agree with certain aspects of it. I disagree with certain aspects of it. I've had concussions and I'm still here. I still love the sport. I think I'm still very healthy.

Quick condemnation of all that is not ours, of views with which we disagree, of ideas that do not attract us, is the sign of a narrow mind, of an uncultivated intelligence. Bigotry is always ignorant, and the wise boy, who will become the wise man, tries to understand and to see the truth in ideas with which he does not agree.

Why do Planned Parenthood and their allies only 'trust women' and only want to hear women's stories when they agree with Planned Parenthood? Why do they work to silence any women who disagree with them? Don't our stories matter?

I'm a Republican. I'm a former Red Sox. I have a nasty habit of talking - a lot - about anything anyone asks me and totally unconcerned about giving you my opinion. You will never question where I stand - right or wrong, agree or disagree - on anything.

Michael Savage turns on a microphone and broadcasts his opinions to faithful followers who enjoy listening to his views on politics, social issues, and anything else that this colorful, provocative, entertaining guy comes up with. It doesn't matter which of his views I agree or disagree with.

There's so many ways in which Canada and America are inextricably connected politically, economically, socially. There's no stepping away. But at the same time, we don't have a say. Canada is a different country. Sometimes I think of it as Finland in the Soviet era. We're totally free, but we're totally free to agree, basically. If we disagree too heartily or over too sensitive an issue, then we pay a price for that.

Do you know people on the Right who are tolerant of people who are for gay marriage and are pro-choice? I actually do, plenty of them. When there is a disagreement, I see way more people on the Right... more often willing to agree to disagree rather than to de-friend or to smear.

The reason that we're seeing so many people flee the Left - I like to call them liberal refugees, like myself - is because they do not allow you to think freely. If you agree with them 95 percent and disagree on 5 percent, you are essentially excommunicated. You're not allowed to be a liberal anymore. You're not allowed to be a Democrat anymore.