The highly partisan nature of national politics these days may lead Republicans to alienate themselves from President Barack Obama and other Democrats rather than accepting them as politicians, too, whose mistakes and successes might hold examples from which to learn. Continuities and differences between Obama’s presidential acceptance speeches from 2008 and this year, for example, could point to lessons about governing the Republican Party needs to learn as the members of its brain trust seek to repackage the party for a changing electorate.

Both the 2008 and the 2012 speeches reveal a great deal of optimism on Obama’s part. Twice he presented the United States as the inheritor of a deep legacy of democratic “of the people, by the people, for the people” traditions and as possessor of a deep reserve of power with which we can resolve problems of climate change, national security, job growth, health care reform — all of which he mentioned in both speeches.

But the presence of those issues four years ago as well as today shows that, for all the bloviating declamation, little has changed. Unemployment is nearly at the same level as it was at Obama’s inauguration: 7.8 percent in January 2009 and 7.9 percent in October 2012. The national debt has continued to balloon: On Jan. 20, 2009, the national debt was $10.6 trillion; currently it is $16.3 trillion.

Opposition for the sake of opposition, failing to treat other representatives and other senators as equals who also vote on bills, failing to be honest about their intentions and speak from shared values rather than opposing ground — these are the qualities which emphatically do not resolve any of our problems.

To say that “compromise” is essential is to oversimplify the point, especially in a divided government. Critics have belabored that point for years, and clearly it has moved no one. Compromises arrived at in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives may very well be dead on arrival in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

As much as we would love to see fiery debates in both chambers rather than C-Span speeches delivered to an empty room, agreement on solutions that can actually pass both houses as well as receive the president’s signature require a more holistic approach. In addition to agreeing on specifics, they will have to finally arrive at a consensus on the values that American policy should reflect.

Obama’s margin of victory in the popular vote, a mere 3 million Americans, is no mandate for him nor for the Democrats. Nor, however, is it a mandate for the Republicans. And the United States deserves more than an impasse.