The “winner” will be the side that doesn’t care about being branded the winner. We hope both sides aspire to that Zen-like ideal.

But beyond that, some ideas are emerging that seem to be good starting points. For example, the governor told The Free Press editorial board on Friday that philosophically, he favors progressive taxation. While he notes Minnesota is a state that has one of the most progressive tax systems, and that certain sales taxes recently imposed by the Legislature make it more regressive, he doesn’t outright reject the idea that wealthy pay a higher percentage of their income, or at least the same percentage. Progressive taxation is an idea the DFL has long embraced.

So there’s kind of an agreement about how we might spread a tax burden or a cost burden on a philosophical level.

The DFL and governor have in the past agreed on many green initiatives that are leading our state toward investing in renewable energy industries and creating incentives for us to use more biofuels and renewable energy. The governor notes Minnesota leads the country in many of these areas. He would be remiss not to give some of the DFL credit for helping bring this along.

Tax and spending issues will be a little more difficult to come to agreement on. However, the DFL-led Senate made clear on Thursday its willingness to enact spending cuts, by proposing to cut 7 percent nearly across the board. Gov. Pawlenty also favors spending cuts, but in a more program-by-program approach.

Both sides seem to be moving toward reforms in education that provide incentives to increase teacher pay and tie it more to performance than seniority. There’s a working model in the Q Comp program that may actually increase teacher pay (an idea embraced by both the governor and the DFL), and increase efforts to measure if students are learning.

Some DFL leaders have floated the idea of increasing the coverage of the sales tax but lowering the rate as well as lowering some business taxes. The governor wants to lower business taxes, and said he objects to imposing taxes on food and clothing, but not necessarily other items. His reason suggests he doesn’t want to hurt those average Minnesotans buying their basic needs. But would he consider an exemption from the food and clothing tax based on income? Maybe.

On local aid to cities, the governor seems willing to compromise with cities. He correctly notes, however, that in current economic times, a city’s first negotiating position can’t be that it cannot reduce spending at all.

That suggests the governor believes absolutes at the beginning of a new negotiation are probably not a reasonable approach.

Logically, the governor would have to apply that reasoning to his own “absolutes” at the beginning of his negotiations with the DFL Legislature.