By John Grindrod
Guest Columnist
Next week, America will again have one of those special days, the kind that only comes around every four years when the final votes will be counted to determine who’ll call 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue home for the next four years. Since early voting started in some states as early as mid-September, what we’ll see Tuesday isn’t truly an election day, rather the final day of voting.
As I watched another campaign unfold between the two main candidates, I have one overriding thought as to the nature of politics these days. That overriding thought is that the division that exists between the two parties is wider than any I have ever sensed in all my 73 years.
Following an election of the person who’ll occupy the Oval Office, it’s not uncommon for the elected person in his inauguration speech to promise to build a bridge to address those deep and bitter divisions that exist and unite us, regardless of party affiliation, and convince the nation to join hands and sing “Kum ba yah.”
However, that just never seems to happen. Except for a minority of folks who proudly identify as independents, the ones that each presidential candidate yearns to convert, most voters remain entrenched in one or the other party’s belief set and unanimously support issues that are extremely partisan, whether it be how to protect the environment, how to reform gun policies, how to fund the military or how to approach the pro-life-pro-choice issue among others.
The division that exists surely isn’t the only thing that puzzles me about our political climate. For instance, I’m old enough to remember the major newscasters, such as Chet Huntley, David Brinkley and Walter Cronkite, and never do I recall any evidence of their political leanings bleeding into how the news they presented was packaged and voiced. In contrast, today, within at the most about five minutes of watching a network during either a newscast or a news-forum program, I can tell without a doubt what their bias is.
As for the division that exists between the two parties and the supporters of those parties, it became even clearer to me while watching this campaign, one that mercifully will end in a few days. Strong rhetoric, often fueled by opposition research intended to discredit the opposing candidate was far more common unfortunately. What ethnicity someone is, who’s better looking or how someone laughs are both personal and totally irrelevant to me.
When there are so many issues with which we as a nation struggle, finding content for speeches shouldn’t be that hard. Candidates who sidetrack themselves when campaigning by wasting time on non-policy issues, which often degenerate to personal attacks, are wasting opportunities to grab those independent voters’ support that ultimately will make the difference when it comes to who wins.
The power of oppositional politics is so strong that if one party is for something, it’s a proverbial lead-pipe cinch the other will oppose it, with little thought as to whether it’s really good for the country. And when there is little by way of compromise from those we send to represent us, how can we ever get anything accomplished?
As I look at this nation with its two groups comprised of people whose heels are dug in and who are too unyielding to compromise, I can’t help but think back to so many of the Catholic families whose children attended school with me, such as the Seggerson, the Gallagher and the Ciminello families and so many others, families that numbered anywhere from nine and 12 people. There couldn’t have been any shortage of disagreements, but for those families to succeed, and they most certainly did, there certainly had to be lots of successful negotiation and compromise.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could have a lot more of that type of compromise today from those we send to political offices? When all the votes are counted following next Tuesday’s final day of voting, and one of the two stands before us to begin the biggest of jobs, my guess is approximately half of the country will shake their collective heads in disgust.
While I don’t think the political chasm has reached Civil War proportions, it can’t be good for our country. I’m not naïve enough to think that our next four years will bring us all together around the campfire to toast marshmallows, but let’s hope that in these next four years maybe we can shrink the gap some.
I’m praying that’s not too much to ask.
John Grindrod is a regular columnist for The Lima News, a freelance writer and editor and the author of two books. Reach him at [email protected].
