Maybe a little of both are in order here. If you just take things as they come and constantly vote between the lesser of two evils, evil is what you will eventually arrive at. Lets take the bull by the horns and make our own future. Our own destiny. Gee... am I getting unpractical or what! I think James Madison, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams and The Sons of Liberty might have been a little unpractical as well.
There were horrible, nasty arguments that lasted for years and in the end several of them (Madison and Jefferson, I think) would not even speak to each other. So you can't tell me that they each got exactly the country they envisioned. They ended up compromising on some things in order to create a reasonable facsimile of the country they'd hoped for. In fact, that is the entire essence of our country.
We agree on some things more readily than others. For instance most of us, conservatives and liberals alike, think that this weeks SCOTUS takings law is really bad. So I have a feeling that will be fixed though legislation shortly, because it's easy. But the harder stuff, we have to take on one step at a time and it may require some compromise. President Reagan did this very well, although he was roundly criticized by conservatives at the time.
Anyway, for right now, I support the president in the two areas he emphasized in the campaign: the war and social security. I am not going to stand for a compromise on the war; I am willing to take a slight compromise on SS as long as it moves the ball in the right direction.
Gotta go. I don't entirely disagree with the concept of voting on principles—it's just that I think sometimes that can send us further away from the goal. JMHO though. No hard feelings.