So what’s up for the country in the next few years?
- Putting the military under international control
- Banning private possession of firearms
- Removing the word “God” from all dictionaries
- Appointing only Supreme Court justices who have conducted same-sex marriages
No, wait. The Republicans won. Different set of priorities:
- Tax cuts for the enormously wealthy
- Clear cutting the Alaska wilderness, and parts of Massachusetts
- Establishment of religious courts in all jurisdictions
- Overthrow of Belgium, to remove King Albert
OK, maybe that’s a little extreme. But it’s not too far off the mark of some of the words that flew around during the campaign, with candidates and commentators warning of the grave consequences if the other guy won. And now that the election is past, the pundits are busily showing the blue-red divide and telling us again and again just how divided we are.
One of the most disturbing things I heard on election day (I told myself I wasn’t going to listen to the news until the next morning, but it’s always there) was that only a small percentage of voters said they’d be satisfied to support the other candidate. That kind of partisanship may work in football games, but it’s scary to hear it applied to the people who, for better or worse, are going to be governing this country.
So let’s back off, take a deep breath and try to understand just who we are. First of all people who inhabit the red states and support Republicans are not mindless rubes who spend all day Sunday in church and carry shotguns in their pickups. (Hey, weren’t Republicans supposed to all be fat cat financial types?) They are normal, working men and women who live normal lives, and don’t especially want them to change. In particular, they don’t want to accept new definitions to words like marriage, which have worked for them for many years. One-on-one, in families and communities, people are tolerant and accepting of all sorts of lifestyles. They accept change as well, but slowly: Look at the difference in American communities since the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s. There are plenty of them living in cities in the “blue” states.
And the blue state folks are not all long-haired college professors, poverty professionals and media stars. They are normal, working men and women who live normal lives, and don’t especially want them to change. If there’s a difference, maybe it’s that they think other people’s lives should change to be more like theirs. They’re more likely to live in big cities, where they see more variety in their surroundings, and they’re likely to be more tolerant of different groups. In fact, they probably are more likely to identify with some kind of group – a union, a nonprofit, or even an unorganized group of like minded individuals. They consider themselves modern, and bask in most of the attention of the entertainment and information media.
Now, red states are full of blue people. Blue states are full of red people. It’s a matter of numbers. We all were shown maps on election night that cut a clear boundary - blue in the northeast, west and upper midwest; red everywhere else. But if you can get a copy of the New York Times of 11/4/04, take a look at the map printed on the last page of the special election section. It shows how we voted county by county. And it shows clearly the big blue circles around many of the cities in the south, as well as the red dots covering much of the land area of blue US. It's a much better depiction of our national divide, and one that the Democratic Party is going to have to figure out.
