Bipartisanship only works if all sides want to be constructive; not one side acting like a concrete barrier to ANY ideas. Just "No-No- and again-No!" without any suggestions forthcoming and an overwhelming desire to unseat the leaders of the other side at any cost.
Sound familiar.
If the shoe fits wear it.
By the way, Feingold has stated in print that he has no desire to run for either state or national office this time round, more's the pity He'd be a good replacement for the appalling Walker at home for a start!

Bipartisanship is only meaningful when there are significant differences between parties, and where all points on the political spectrum are represented in European-style proportional representation that provides genuine diversity of perspective. The US fulcrum is tilted so far one way (Obama is well to the right of European conservative leaders, as the post-banking crisis G20 summit clearly revealed)that the "middle ground" in the US is as meaningless as the middle ground in Apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany...it simply means continuation of the status quo - the prevailing free market economic orthodoxy with softer rhetoric , overblown small "differences" and relatively minor issues of identity politics. Most Americans know that under the present system,there's no room for a third party.But how about a second party? The American eagle is a democratically flightless bird, with two right wings. Henry Adams recognised this way back in the 1890s:
“We have a single system,” he wrote, and “in that system the only question is the price at which the proletariat is to be bought and sold, the bread and circuses.”