I have heard the word "transactional" used to describe a politician. The online dictionaries I've consulted do not provide a definition that seems to fit. It seems, in context, to mean that the politician is NOT acting out of any ideology or overall policy, but just to be seen as the victor on every action. The dictionaries do not appear to provide a definition like that. I cannot tell from context whether the word is being used as an insult or compliment - or possibly neither
To me, transactional would me, in effect, considering each act as a trade for something — a transaction. He/she would receive something of value in exchange for whatever service/vote they are providing.
To me, transactional would me, in effect, considering each act as a trade for something — a transaction. He/she would receive something of value in exchange for whatever service/vote they are providing.
Yep, you are calling them a political whore.
Not necessarily, as a large part of governance is advocating for your particular district, thus often, in the proper context, transitional is beneficial to all, as politicians, in particular, are more willing to compromise, if they each gain something in exchange for their votes.
So while that too is entirely 'transactional', it's done in an effort to help both sides, not just enriching the politician, benefiting his constituents, at least theoretically.
I have to suspect that most uses of transactional regarding a person are at least mildly derogatory. That it is used to indicate that they don't have a strong sense of what is right or wrong in a situation, but are willing to trade.
This is particularly true in political contexts, because there you do have an enormous number of people with strong senses of what should be done (even if there is wild disagreement in what that something should be).
Mostly, I see it as derogatory, coming from a view that politicians should either have values that dictate their actions, should do what their constituents would want them to do, or some other external thing.
On the other hand (and playing devil's advocate), I could see someone making the argument that every negotiation is a transaction and thus being 'transactional' means getting the best results for their constituents / the country / etc, rather than standing on principle in a way that does worse for those groups.
One of the usual connotations of being called 'transactional' seems to be that the goal is not the best deal for those groups but instead for the politician personally, though. In that case, it's pretty much always derogatory.