I was asked by the smart people at SMART (Social
Media Approaches for Resisting Trump) how I communicate with Trump supporters.
In Part 1 of my blog, I cautioned folks about the “Blow it all up! Brigade, a
camp made up of mostly family. My advice: Stay Calm and Listen on…then walk
away. This group has no intention of opening their minds, and in the end, they
will cause heartbreak.
So that brings us to the Republicans whom you can have a positive discussion. These
friends have the sense to not discuss politics unless it comes up naturally in
conversation. They are not going to threaten their cherished friendship with
you over the latest Trump tweet. They will diplomatically say: “I can’t stand
Trump-he’s an idiot, but I can’t vote for Hillary so I voted for McCain”; “I
have friends who are legal Mexicans and they don’t favor the Mexicans coming
here ignoring our immigration laws”; “Let’s give him a chance”; “I’m concerned
with his climate change policy, but on jobs, he understands business and
government over-regulations.” Now with these folks, you can share some food for
thought.
First, Tom Friedman’s newest book Thank You for Being Late is
spot on. Some of his best
arguments remind us how Americans really do believe in the idea that ours is
the finest government, still far from a “more perfect union.” Here is an
excerpt (I hope he does not sue me):
“The G.O.P. used to be
an incredibly rich polyculture. It gave us ideas as diverse as our national
parks (under Theodore Roosevelt), the Environmental Protection Agency and Clean
Air and Water Acts (under Richard Nixon), radial nuclear arms control and the
Montreal Protocol to close the ozone layer (under Ronald Reagan), cap-and-trade
to curb acid rain (under George H.W. Bush), and market-based health care reform
(under Mitt Romney)….And for decades the party itself was a pluralistic amalgam
of northern liberal Republicans and southern and western conservatives.”
Knowing this information
will make you grow in the eyes of the folks who are life-long Republicans and, well,
it’s the truth. However, in the next sentence (pg. 321), Friedman puts the
pedal to the political metal.
“But in recent years the
Tea Party and other hyperconservative forces, also funded in large part by fossil
fuel companies and oil billionaires, have tried to wipe out the Republican
Party’s once rich polyculture and turn it into a monoculture that’s enormously
susceptible to diseased ideas: climate change is a hoax;….All this weakened the
G.O.P’s foundation and opened the way for an invasive species such as Donald
Trump to make deep inroads into the garden.”
Perhaps sharing
Friedman’s history lessons may help in communicating to moderate, fair minded
friends. I will usually admit both political parties have their corruptions,
and I agree that what is best for the country matters, not what is best for a
politicians’ future. You can remind them that Obamacare votes by Democrat congress-folk cost them their jobs, but 20 million un-insured people finally got
a break and improving the ACA is best course of action. Why? The premiums
without the ACA would rise anyway, and the insurance industry is not interested
in your preconditions or accepting ‘no
lifetime maximums’. Remind friends that President H.W. Bush’s actions in
Operation Desert Storm (by not invading Iraq) hurt his re-election chances, but
history showed he was on right side, and a man of honor. (Avoid mentioning his
son’s invasion of Iraq years later.)
Second, you need to reach common, respectful ground. One of my friends served admirably in Vietnam
and is pro-military and pro-Trump. He has seen death and destruction. Normally,
GI’s know how war is senseless, and he will agree, but he will argue we need a big stick and ‘wield’ it. He fears
ISIS. Again, respect is due to folks like him. ISIS, and other violent groups,
like American racists, are a plague on all humanity, I say. However, a refugee
fleeing from that same evil is not a terrorist; they are terrorized. Also, I
find that issues like global warming and healthcare to be areas that we can
agree. In in that way, a bridge is formed.
The same is true of
people who have been displaced by corporations via outsourcing or even worse,
making their severance contingent on training their replacement! All of us can see how bitter and angry they
become. They turn to Rush, etc. who will scream that this was all Mr. Obama’s
fault, despite the reality that the business follows one mantra: keep the
shareholders happy and the profits soaring.
Finally, on immigration,
which can be a tough subject to broach, here is something to ask others (or
yourself). If we cast a net 11 million people wide, how will we know who is
legal or illegal? Should those with brown faces wear a large, scarlet A on
their chest to signal that they are ‘aliens’? Or are any of us comfortable
going up to these people asking them to “show me your papers.”
I don’t know if the
gardener, hotel worker, farm worker, child caregiver are legal or not. The
construction worker, roofer, or neighbor on my block—I would never ask them to
prove to ME that they belong here, legally. Would your moderate friends “on the
other side of the aisle” be willing to do that? And if they are illegally here,
would they call ICE and have them arrested and torn from their families, many
of which are blended since some are US citizens. Here, in California, this is
an issue on every block, every town, every part of a state that depends on
these workers daily.
***** ***** *****
Last week I sat in the
gallery of the United States’ Senate and watched the confirmation of Supreme
Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. What struck me was that three senators spoke:
McCain, Hatch and Durbin, but when they did, not one senator stayed to hear the
other’s plea. They just walked out. Oh, there was the obligatory “my friend on the
other side of the aisle” opening; then a nod or a smile, depending on party
loyalty, and then they turned and left. No one listened that day, just ‘we the
people’ of the gallery. Then, one by one, senators came in to vote up or down.
Smiles on one side, frowns on the other.
The rules had to be
broken because consensus could not be reached. I felt sorry for the one man
caught in the political clash of ill will. His name is Merrick Garland. His
flaw. He was a centrist. He was President Obama’s choice as The Constitution
demands.
Let us not emulate this
behavior. Let’s be SMART in our conversations with friends on either side
of the aisle.
No comments:
Post a Comment