Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Moving past the feels of the election

Man and woman standing close together. She has an American flag sticking out of her hair.
Sebastian Gollnow/picture alliance via Getty Images

Molineaux is the lead catalyst for American Future, a research project that discovers what Americans prefer for their personal future lives. The research informs community planners with grassroots community preferences. Previously, Molineaux was the president/CEO of The Bridge Alliance.

Much of Nov. 6 was spent talking with friends and family who were alternately angry, sad and disappointed or relieved and hopeful with the results.

“How can people be so dumb?” one friend asked. A different friend noted, “She didn’t have a plan she could articulate.” One couple was researching how to move to another country. Other friends cried for marginalized groups that were targeted in the campaign.


Friends in these marginalized groups haven’t been in touch, but I plan to reach out today. I’ve seen several Facebook notices that people are taking a break, taking time to recover their sense of purpose and power. I personally haven’t turned on any news and will likely wait a few more days. I’m remaining engaged with my community.

I know we are, and will be, OK. I don’t know how to help others feel this too.

Anytime we have a contest with a win/lose dynamic, there is a period of healing needed. After the World Series, the Super Bowl or the Stanley Cup finals, the losing team needs time to accept the loss and make a plan. The winning team needs to celebrate, of course. In sports, these wins and losses don’t set the direction for society as a whole. Elections do. We may need more time to heal.

When I was new to politics — beyond voting — an elder in my community shared an analogy with me. The images were so clear that it touched my heart and set me on the path to understanding my fellow citizens. Here’s the paraphrased analogy:

Every four years, we have a contest about the future of our nation. Each party picks a champion to represent them — a fighter to represent their future interests and priorities. These fighters enter the battlefield, beating and bloodying each other, damaging their bodies, their hearts and their very souls to win. They don’t want to let their party group down. We, the citizens, witness the battle and watch helplessly as our fighter is battered and bloodied. We feel anger, fear, despair and other stress-related emotions. No matter who wins the election, we end up with a pair of broken fighters, one of whom is granted power to effect change. We, the citizens, in witnessing the indignity of the fight itself, are also damaged. There is no honor in this fight, only winning. This is the essence of our election process. And it’s killing our trust and respect for each other, as the only way to gain power to effect change is through this flawed system we call democracy. There has to be a better way.

As I took in this story over 20 years ago, I marveled that our nation had survived. “A republic, if we can keep it,” as Ben Franklin noted. Our survival instincts impose and accept indignity that shrivels our hearts. In that moment, I took a vow to change the system, so we might be whole.

We are in the midst of a society-wide transformation, as our elders have experienced before. The last time our social contract was updated was following World War II, and it no longer serves the majority of Americans. Or the world, for that matter. So what would we like to include in a new social contract?

The Republicans have won the presidency, the Senate and likely the House. The public has spoken and the will of the people is being heard. What do we want for our future? That is an exploration for us all. Too many of my progressive friends have no conservative friends. Many of my conservative friends will share their thoughts with me, but disengage if I disagree. On Election Day, I registered many young men of color as Republicans. My curiosity is piqued, wondering, “What am I missing?”

A few months back, I changed my party registration to Republican. In my heart, I have been a life-long unaffiliated voter, with both libertarian and progressive leanings, who has strategically been a Republican or Democrat to vote in closed primaries. Most recently, I changed it so I could be a Republican chief election judge. As the election results settle in and I talk with friends and family, I’ve decided to stay registered as a Republican.

Too many of us have dismissed, condescended and ostracized those different from ourselves. We judge first and belittle later. I’m rejecting what has been — that vision of two bloody and battered fighters — to find a new path, beginning with my fellow conservative Americans. I’m returning to my roots to learn and grow, providing attentiveness to the pain and preferred future goals that make up the majority of American voters.

What is needed is for us to visit the other side of the bridge — not meet in the middle and return to our own comfortable side of the bridge. Our nation needs us to deeply understand each other and be neighborly. To figure out how to make decisions for our future, together. How to build skills so we can disagree, negotiate and compromise, then live with the results. Our future is dependent upon our courage to visit the other side of the bridge and dwell there for a while.

Is our country worth this effort? It’s our choice.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Political outrage is rising—but dismissing the other side’s anger deepens division. Learn why taking outrage seriously can bridge America’s partisan divide.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger

Over the last several weeks, the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital to crack down on crime. While those on the right have long been aghast by rioting and disorder in our cities, pressing for greater military intervention to curtail it, progressive residents of D.C. have tirelessly protested the recent militarization of the city.

This recent flashpoint is a microcosm of the reciprocal outrage at the heart of contemporary American public life. From social media posts to street protests to everyday conversations about "the other side," we're witnessing unprecedented levels of political outrage. And as polarization has increased, we’ve stopped even considering the other political party’s concerns, responding instead with amusement and delight. Schadenfreude, or pleasure at someone else’s pain, is now more common than solidarity or empathy across party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less