US Election

Now that three weeks have passed since our ghastly election I've decided to post something political after all. Sorry, but I've gotta do it.  I'll be positive, though, I promise.   
In these past weeks I’ve tried, as have many others, to understand what happened.  Clearly, getting my news from the mainstream media alone isn’t sufficient.  I do my best to see both sides by reading The NYT and Washington Post for the left, the WSJ for the right and Time and The Economist for the middle but this didn’t prepare me nor has it helped me to understand.  What to do?  I decided to go outside my comfort zone and look at some of the blogs I’ve heard so much about but have diligently avoided.  This led me to a post on GraniteGrok (http://granitegrok.com/blog/2016/11/open-letter-hillarys-supporters) which professes to be a reach-out to those who voted for Hillary.  An attempt at an olive branch so to speak.  I decided to take him at his word so I responded to his post.  I’m still waiting for his response but thought why not post it on my own blog so here it is.

Dear Mr. Kofalt,

Since your proposal to work together to further civilized debate makes complete sense I decided to do something I’ve never done.  I’m responding to a blog posting. Or, as you’ve phrased it, the ball is in my court so I’m playing it. 

First, I should clarify that just like you, most likely, aren’t an “alt right” Trump voter, I’m not a “liberal” Hillary voter.  Otherwise, both of us wouldn’t be trying to bridge this communication gap.  The good news is that we’re not isolated examples.  We each represent what I think is a majority of our respective voting blocks, people who don’t enjoy this conflict and would like to reach common ground.  This was the tenth presidential election in which I’ve voted, each time as a registered Republican.  Five times I voted for the Republican, four times for the Democrat and once for Perot (a wasted vote which I still regret).   When asked, I describe myself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  Entering the homestretch of this year’s election I confess that I was indeed, to use your words, one of those who thought all Trump supporters were hate mongers, Neanderthals and uneducated dolts.  The election changed this, however, because too many people that I know, respect and love voted for him.  This is not something to be casually shaken off and on its own will not go away.  We need to work together to understand each other. 

Hopefully, you will not be surprised that I agree fully with you on some of your points while on others we share the basic objective but differ only on the path to get there.   Also, and most importantly, I am 100% in agreement that we need to allow or, better yet, encourage, civilized dissent.   I also agree that even speech which might be interpreted as hateful or hurtful must be permitted.   I think that you would agree, though, that speech that can be interpreted as hateful usually doesn’t contribute to civilized discussion (on both sides, of course).   

You mention that I may consider you a racist and xenophobe if you object to open borders and unrestrained immigration.   Well, I’m am not a proponent of unrestrained immigration either so if that is the extent of your objection then my opinion is that you are not a racist or xenophobe.   However, if you believe that we should categorically restrict immigration on the basis of religion then, on that point, we disagree.  Do you?  Just trying to drill down to fully to understand the nature of our disagreement, if there is one.

You express concern that if you oppose a massive, failed welfare state in which hard-working people pay to sustain a permanent underclass then I will consider you selfish and mean-spirited.  I am also not a fan of unrestricted welfare but do you include access to health care in the welfare bucket?  As I’m sure you’re aware, it is children who suffer disproportionately when access to health care isn’t available.  Is that what you want?   If the answer is yes, then I do think that you are being selfish and mean.  If not, we agree again.

On the matter of the environment, I don’t know anyone who hates it and most people I know, including those who voted for Hillary, support America’s quest for energy independence.  So I think I agree with you on this one too.   I do believe, however, that some energy sources can be more damaging to the environment than others and that this should be part of any reasonable discussion.   Coal is a valid source of energy as long as the power plants are properly regulated.  If not, well, that’s why all of the buildings were black in Europe a hundred years ago and China’s air is so awful today.   

You noted that I might consider anyone who isn’t convinced that man-made global warming is real to be an ignorant flat-earther who simply doesn’t believe in science.   My perspective on this is that no one absolutely knows what is going to happen but there are many well respected scientists who make good arguments for the global warming side and the consequence for ignoring it is pretty dire.  It’s a huge gamble, one whose down side is a price that we, those living now, will not have to pay.  So, my position is that there’s too much at stake and ignoring it is less a matter of ignorance and more a matter of selfishness.  Are you that selfish?  Probably not. 

You’re concerned that I think you hate women if you (I quote you directly here) “object to butchering children in the womb or even as they are in the process of being born, cutting them up, and selling their body parts.”  This is the only point you made in a way that you should be ashamed of.  Clearly no one feels that way, certainly not in the provocative way you’ve phrased it.   I am very much not a proponent of abortion and would never advise someone else to have an abortion.  But I feel equally strongly that it is not my choice to make for someone else.  I do, however, understand the point I think you have attempted to make so do not feel at all that this means you hate women.   It would be better, though, to make your point in another way.  It’s not very helpful towards furthering the dialog you profess to favor. 

You resent being told that if you have any concerns about allowing men to use women’s bathrooms you are a reactionary bigot.  I assume that you refer to the gender identity issue and whether people who are born one sex but identify with the other should be allowed to use that bathroom.  I admit to not understanding the gender identity thing.  You have a woman who thinks she’s a guy and therefore lives as a guy.  Does that person then date a woman?  Does that woman know that he was a she?  Like I said, I don't get it but my position is that I don't have to get it.  “It” doesn’t affect me.  Now if we take this same example and apply it to the bathroom concern, we have this person that looks and behaves like a guy being forced to use the woman’s bathroom.  Do you really want that?  Probably not so I don’t think you’re a bigot. I just think you haven’t really discussed this with someone on that side of the fence.  Have you?

I’m glad that you don't think that others’ sex lives are your business.   There are some who do but that number is small and dropping quickly.   In any event, I never considered this to be a Trump supporter position anyway.     

The matter of photo ID at the polls always seemed to me to be a solution looking for a problem.  I’m not aware of a voter fraud problem.  I’ve looked and looked and haven’t found any evidence.  If you’ve got any, please let me know.  If not, why do anything that makes it more difficult to vote?  I don’t think you are a fascist and I don’t think that you explicitly want to deny people the right to vote but this action has that effect.  Bottom line, again, is why?  Why do anything that makes it even a little more difficult to vote and brings no advantage and solves no problem?  But I do think that for some people minority vote suppression is the objective. 

On the gun control issue, I’m certain that there are very few creepy “gun nuts” with paranoid tendencies and an inclination towards violence.   Therefore, I do not think that you or other Trump supporters are categorically such people.    I confess that I don’t understand the desire to own assault weapons but I don’t understand the desire to attend opera either.   For me, it’s not a hill to die on so while I disagree with unfettered access to guns of all shapes and sizes, I don’t resent you voting in this direction. 

Muslim immigration.  Oops, here’s one where I think we do sharply disagree.  I do consider those who support restrictions on immigration of Muslims (refugees or otherwise) to be religious bigots.  It’s pretty much the definition of a religious bigot.  This is probably the issue on which Trump has been most irresponsible. Probably no common ground here, though, so let’s agree to disagree and move on. 

Your concern that I believe you are a racist if you don't fully support Barack Obama and all of his policies is unfounded.   I don’t support everything he’s done either.  I’m generally happy with what he’s done but not everything.  So, we’re in agreement again. 

The next concern is that I think that if you didn’t vote for Hillary then you are denying women the dignity and equality that they deserve.  I might have said this in July once Trump was declared the Republican candidate, mostly because I thought he was so unqualified and I would have been searching for any explanation for those who supported him.  It would definitely not have been because I thought Hillary deserved it though.  No one “deserves” the presidency.  It’s not a reward, it’s a job of great responsibility.  Ultimately, the way things went down on November 8^th convinced me that there is indeed an explanation besides misogyny.   We do not have 25 million misogynistic women.  They voted for him for another reason as, I assume, did you.  I need to work harder to understand this better.  I hope that you appreciate that the time I’ve spent writing this shows that I’m trying.

So, there we have it.  We either agree on most points or at least I don’t think negatively of you for taking the positions you have.   There is one where I think you seem to be a religious bigot but on the whole, pretty reasonable.  Certainly a starting point for further, spirited but civilized, discussion. 

On the general topic of Barack Obama, he’s clearly taken some actions that you disagree with.  I’m pretty sure that Trump will now enact some changes that I will disagree with but it’s hard to say just yet as there may be a big difference between his campaign rhetoric and what he actually intends to do.   I hope so anyway.  One of the points you didn’t make, one which I would have fully agreed with, is that there is a huge dissatisfaction with the growing gap between rich and poor and how the middle class is being ignored.  I’m surprised you didn't raise it since I think it is one of the main reasons Trump won the election.   Sanders is the only candidate who would have attempted to address this.  He wouldn’t have gotten very far but he would have tried.  Trump implies he will address this.  At least that is the understanding that many of his supporters have.  I hope he will and I am ready to give him a chance.   

How did I do in explaining my position in a civilized fashion?  Can we continue the dialog?