I am 53 years old.  That means my hair is thinning, I’m having a hard time maintaining energy to work out and keep weight off, I’m losing my hearing, and I’m starting to forget things way too easily.  I’m also starting to forget things way too easily (if you’ll recognize that my repetition there was intentional and meant to be funny the rest of this diatribe will be much easier for both of us!).

Being 53 also means that the 1984 Presidential Election between Ronald Reagan and Walter Mondale was the first presidential election I was old enough to participate in by voting.  I did vote, and I’ve voted in every election since.

I remember voting with pride for Ronald Reagan, and sharing my vote with pride with my friends, because Reagan won in a landslide (525 Electoral Votes to Mondale’s 13!).  There weren’t a ton of Mondale supporters running around to find, so it was a very safe pride.  Republicans had won two elections in a row (this was Reagan’s second win) and would go on to win a third term when George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis in 1988.   The 1988 Election was the last time any candidate reached the 400 Electoral vote mark (426).  1988 also marked the first election since 1976 that New York voted Democrat.  That state has been solidly blue ever since.

Bill Clinton would win in 1992 with 370 Electoral votes versus Bush’s 168.   California voted Democrat in 1992, and has been solidly blue ever since.

Why does any of this matter?

It matters because the end of safe pride started in 1992.

We are a divided country, politically, and until a dramatic cultural and demographic shift impacts another populous state like New York and California (are you listening Texas and Florida) then, we will continue to be such a divided country.  And therefore, it matters because if we don’t learn to live together in this politically divided country, we will become more than just politically divided.   None of us were around in 1860, the last election before the Civil War.  But take a look at this Electoral Map:

Isn’t it weird to see such big blocks of states so divided ideologically?  Hold that thought.

Why do I say the end of safe pride?  I remember the 1992 election.  I was now out of college, and more attuned to national politics.  I actually watched the news.  And for the first time in my life, I became much more aware of other political views.  My oldest brother, it turns out, is a Democrat (gasp!).  And apparently a pretty active one!  And, he’s pretty damn smart!  And, I actually like him.  But, he’s a Democrat!   It also turns out that a lot of my high school and college friends are Democrats.  And pretty active ones.  And pretty smart.   And, I actually like them.  But I grew up in a safer environment with my brother, my high school, and college friends.

You see, back in my day, we didn’t have these fantastical, portable computing devices!  But that’s right around when they started to appear.    The World Wide Web was created around 1990, and the first web browser showed up a little while after the 1992 election (anyone remember CompuServ?).  And that’s how it began.

Suddenly it became about immediacy.  It wasn’t good enough to wait for the 6 o’clock news.  People became empowered when they had news first.  I was somehow just a little bit better than you if I knew things before you.  1992 also featured the introduction of the Headline News SportsTicker on CNN.  MSNBC and Fox News came along in 1996, and, of course, September 11, 2001, brought on the need for true 24-hour news and the permanent news ticker on almost every news station.  Out of the information boom that was the web was born a faster, yet more, fractured news cycle.

And right in the middle of this new, information boom, came the 2000 election, where George W. Bush won the national electoral college vote by 5 votes, while the national popular vote totals favored Al Gore by only 540,000 votes … the very definition of divided … right down the middle.  By this time, if I proudly shared my vote, there was a very good chance the person I was sharing with had voted opposite me.  Stories about how this candidate had done something terrible to someone else had been quickly spread across the nation, so not only did you hear that your vote was wrong, the repudiation was accompanied by a news story that you might not have heard yet.  It was so important to keep up!

Tuesday, September 11^th, 2001.  The country was rocked by a horrific attack.  The horror led to a national sense of outrage, yet pride and patriotism.  Honestly, when I think back on that day and the days that followed, our petty squabbles today seem so, well, petty.

Following 9/11, we faced a confusing set of decisions on who these new enemies were, and how we should fight them.  We were launched into a series of confusing wars, with devastating consequences.  And the new, 24-hour news cycle, which had new shows dedicated to exploring both sides of all issues, forced you to choose those sides.

George W. Bush guided the nation through those dark days, but the nation grew weary and suspicious of the wars and its true motives, and a financial collapse driven by a selfish financial sectors’ opportunistic and usurious methods led to a historic political shift.  In 2008, Barrack Obama was elected president with the largest margin of victory since Bill Clinton’s re-election in 1996.  Obama was our first African American President.  He was also the 5^th youngest president in U.S. history, and was much more in tune with more modern trends, technology, music, fashion AND social media.

Social Media?  The term that dominates so much of our lives today wasn’t really a thing at the time of the September 11 attacks.  But by the end of Bush’s second term, we had entirely new social structures like SixDegrees, MySpace, and Friendster.  And, we had the now ubiquitous Facebook, started in 2004, and Twitter, started in 2006.  Isn’t it hard to imagine?  These communities, these definers of culture, these dispensers of news, these indispensable appendages to us all, are barely 10 years old.

Social Media?  Is it meant to be social, or is it meant to be media?  My personal experience with the new Facebook was social, as it was an amazing tool to reconnect with long lost friends and quickly discover what was going on in their lives, and share updates on my life experiences.  My personal experience with the new Twitter was media.  I used it primarily to follow news headlines and get quick, easy updates.  The device that made it all blur together, however, came to us in 2007.  The amazing power and sexy design of the iPhone changed the world.  Now, all of the benefits of the world-wide web, combined with the network created by social media, was mobile.  It was everywhere, all the time, and ready to report the important, the life changing AND the mundane AND the silly AND the absurd.

Suddenly, as if overnight, getting things first was no longer good enough.  Suddenly, getting things LIKED became important.  Suddenly, getting FOLLOWERS became important.  The line between social and media and NEWS began to blur horribly.  New entrants to the world of “news” came on the scene …

• Slate 2004
• Huffington Post 2005
• Breitbart 2007
• The Blaze 2011
• Occupy Democrats 2012

Our self-esteem, and our sense of import became driven by how many people followed us, liked our comments, retweeted our tweets, or shared our comments.  Did my selfies get a good reaction?  Were my food shots cool?  Were my sunsets gorgeous and jealousy inducing, and were my views reinforced by others?

There it is, really.  That last one.  Suddenly, I had the ultimate filter.  I could unfollow or unlike those whose views were different, and only follow those that shared my ideals.  Why should we deal with THOSE people … that basket of deplorables, or those whiny snowflakes.  As I made my filter choices, my exposure to other ideas lessened, and my sensitivity to those same ideas increased.  I didn’t want to hear them, and when I did, I became incensed!  Why couldn’t they see what I saw??

And into that setting, and into that powder keg of ideology stepped Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  Hillary represented everything that many conservatives despised … big, corrupt government, more taxes and more restrictions on personal choice.  Donald Trump was horrifying to liberals … divisive, vulgar and wanting to dismantle large government programs like healthcare.

We were so sensitive that we could never get to debate.  We watched what were called debates, but there was none.  The definition of debate is a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.  I don’t remember seeing anything looking formal, and certainly didn’t hear arguments, at least not being put forward.  I heard insults and rants.  Why did these two act that way?  Because it drove likes and shares and retweets and followers, and that drives self-esteem … even for politicians.

Who felt safe sharing their vote after this election?  Did anyone share their vote on social media and NOT get a vociferous response from someone who voted for the other side?  Here are some actual quotes that appeared on my wall:

“Trump supporters don’t seem to have a moral gauge at all” (really?  NONE of them?!?)

“Liberalism – there is only one solution for it – Euthanasia.” (seriously?!?)

And that leads to our electoral map of 2016.

Isn’t it weird to see such big blocks of states so divided ideologically?

Before any group claims absolute victory … “Trump won 3000 counties to Clinton’s 450”, or “Clinton won the popular vote by over 2.5 million votes” … there are a couple of sobering facts for both sides to consider.  Less than 30 percent of eligible voters actually voted for Trump, or Clinton, and more people chose NOT to vote than to vote for either one, by a margin of over 29 million!  That’s the ultimate “None of the Above” vote.  So NO ONE has the moral high ground here!

Do I believe we’re heading toward a Civil War?  I do not, and I certainly pray that we’re not, yet friends of mine (at least “Facebook friends”) were actually suggesting that a California Brexit (#CalExit) would be the best solution.  Surely, that would be better for citizens of their state than having to suffer through the tragedy of having a bombastic Republican president leading the Federal Government of a United States of America that they are a part of.  They will simply unfollow and unlike America, at least the “Red” states.

I honestly do believe it’s possible, however, that our United States could fracture, if we do not regain the ability for safe pride.  I must be able to share my beliefs, with pride, and not get attacked for simply having them.  If you share a countering view with civility and logic, I may well be persuaded.  If you tell me I should be euthanized because I have a belief, I’m a little less likely to want to talk to you!  I’d rather get my group of like-minded friends together and leave the union.  We’ve been there before folks, and it didn’t go well … 620,000 Americans lost their lives.

I’d like to not have to question news sources because I need to know their political leanings before I can trust the facts of the story.  This week we learned of the term “alternative facts” and people laughed at the craziness of the term.  Alternative facts are not facts, decried Chuck Todd!  Well, in our divided world of social media, that’s exactly what we get.  The facts are indeed alternated to fit the desired narrative.

I would like a different ending.  I’d like to get back to dialog, and back to debate.  Maybe it will happen.  I pray that it will happen.

Most of you know that I work for The Coca-Cola Company.  I have for 28 years, so it’s not like I’ve been hiding it!  Anyway, maybe we could agree on this beautiful sentiment, originally put forth by my company over 45 years ago …

I’d like to buy the world a home and furnish it with love,

Grow apple trees and honey bees, and snow white turtle doves.

I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony,

I’d like to buy the world a Coke and keep it company.

 

NOTE:  Maps sourced from 270towin.com