I think conservatives generally dislike change. They would rather stick with the old method of doing something even if it's only working for them and not the majority of Americans. I also feel as though conservatives are more stubborn and less likely to give an inch in regards to their policies or beliefs. What they fail to see however, is that being able to see the other side of the issue, compromising and passing bipartisan legislation doesn't make one "weak" or a "flip flopper" or even the dreaded "L" word (liberal!), it means they're back to working for the majority of the American people.
Liberals or progressives welcome change and are much more open to ideas that benefit the majority of Americans because they see it as being for the "greater good." I think the problem with liberals is sometimes their reach exceeds their grasp. Liberals believe in social and economic justice and a government that protects and serves the vast majority of Americans, not just the minority rich. Liberals also care deeply about their beliefs and are sometimes uncompromising in those beliefs, but I also find that they're more willing to look for and find common ground solutions to what ails America.
Let's take taxes for example. Conservatives often say "it's your money you should get to keep more of it." But then why is the US subsidizing big business and interfering in the "free" market by taking more of our money from us to prop up US businessess or even businesses with profits in the billions of dollars? Some would also say conservatives wish to "starve the beast" by cutting taxes so much. Less revenue taken in by the government means less Social programs, etc. But it also means less funding for our public schools, teachers, police, firefighters, and military. The vast majority of Americans couldn't afford to pay for all of those things out of pocket which is why we have taxes, so that collectively our citizens can have access to all of those services. So who are the ones proposing a "fair," "flat" or "consumption" tax? Conservative billionaires. Why? Because they can afford all of the programs previously listed and then some. Income earned from Labor is taxed at or near 35% while income earned from investing is only taxed at 15%. Where's the economic justice there?
So here's the Conservative solution: End all taxation and move towards a "consumption/flat/fair" tax. BUT that would work very well for those at the very top and some at the very bottom. But the vast majority of Americans lay somewhere (you guessed it) in the MIDDLE. The fair tax would have to be 30% on just about everything you buy to equal levels of revenue now taken in by our government. This tax idea is anything BUT "fair" for the vast majority of Americans.
Now let's look at a Liberal / progressive solution to taxation. US Corporations need to remain competitive in what is now a global market. The US should lower the Corporate tax rate from 38% to 30%. A Corporation can achieve a "maximum low" of 25% if they adhere to environmental regulations and cut their carbon emissions/ pollution. BUT the US will close every available tax loop hole to those corporations. In addition to these changes, if a US Corporation still wishes to send jobs overseas to exploit a cheaper labor market they must then pay an import tax to sell their goods or services here in the US. This measure will protect American jobs and offset the potential loss of those jobs. In order to achieve more fairness in our tax code, the tax on income earned from labor will be dropped from 35% to 25% while the tax on income earned from investing will be raised from 15% to 25%.
Personally, I feel as though these solutions are not only practical, but they are fair. Conservatives argue in favor of "fair" taxation, well, what's more "fair" than paying the same rate for income earned from labor and income earned from investing? That is, of course, unless conservatives have suddenly changed their minds about what's "fair."