I appreciate your passion, Mariza. The frustration is real when you see such contradictions in voters' reasoning. I wonder, though - has the electorate ever truly been universally "smart, well-informed, and able to think"? I don't think people have suddenly gotten less intelligent. What's changed dramatically is our media ecosystem, whic…
I appreciate your passion, Mariza. The frustration is real when you see such contradictions in voters' reasoning. I wonder, though - has the electorate ever truly been universally "smart, well-informed, and able to think"? I don't think people have suddenly gotten less intelligent. What's changed dramatically is our media ecosystem, which has evolved faster than our ability to navigate it critically.
People are swimming in a sea of conflicting information where algorithms feed them content that reinforces existing beliefs. Media outlets have discovered that catering to political biases is profitable, regardless of educational value. The result isn't stupidity but confusion and tribalism. But they aren’t necessarily a lost cause.
I've noticed cognitive dissonance isn't unique to one political side - I catch myself making similar logical leaps when confronted with information that challenges our narratives. Perhaps instead of concluding "we get what we deserve," we might consider how to rebuild information systems that prioritize clarity over confirmation bias?
Part of me thinks that we as Americans need to admit that none of us are experts enough to know how to vote in our own interest. It’s a full time job to keep democracy healthy. Perhaps, if we really wanted to fix this problem, we need to think about something bold, like having people with paid full time jobs to inform voters from the perspective of a peer, as opposed to a journalist or politician. Someone who has the time to attend city council meetings and read the text of the bills being passed. Because I don’t think there’s any possible future where voters who work so many hours per week have the time to accurately vote in their own interest. Instead, they only have time for a TikTok hot take or an advertisement, both of which are now targeted specifically to engineer a response based on data that’s been mined from our internet activity. I don’t think an effective solution exists that won’t be seen as extremely bold. I’ll keep thinking about this today.
Thanks for your reply, Timothy. And thanks for your suggested solutions. Although I agree with your points, there are some basic principles that don’t require a lot of reading… As an example, during the 2016 presidential campaign, I knew very little about Mr. Trump. And of course, I followed the entire campaign because I wanted to hear about the candidates’ differing visions for our country. However, Mr. Trump lost me when he made that comment about Megyn Kelly “bleeding from everywhere” because in my view, a candidate for the highest office in the country simply MUST respect ALL the people he is supposed to protect, defend, and represent. Period. Mind you, everything else he said or did after that, only served to prove my point.
I think you've articulated what many Americans feel - that there are certain baseline standards of respect and decorum we expect from our leaders, especially the president, and any attempt to meet Trump with an open mind has been met with one non-starter after another. You're right that the current president has made zero effort to bridge the divide with those who didn't support him. Instead of seeking reconciliation, he's often chosen to deepen and profit from those divisions, which only reinforces the polarization we're experiencing.
As for those voters who continue to support Trump, I think there's a wide spectrum of reasons. Some people may not be following politics closely. Others might approach politics transactionally - focusing exclusively on policies that directly impact their lives while overlooking character concerns. I’ve heard from people who are horrified by his actions but still voted for him because they have specific circumstances they felt put their family at risk under Democrat policies, and they wished they had the safety net to vote their conscience. Many were raised to prioritize certain issues above all others, and many were raised to view politics through a tribal lens.
While we can certainly hold our own judgments about these attitudes toward politics, I've found that proving people wrong about their perception of you (and the political identity you represent) is more effective than proving them wrong about their chosen side.
When Trump supporters are treated as if they're intellectually or morally deficient, it validates the narrative they've been told - that the opposition is elitist and condescending. This makes them more likely to reject not just you personally, but anyone associated with your political perspective.
On the other hand, when we approach political conversations with genuine curiosity and openness, we challenge those stereotypes. We demonstrate that it's possible to disagree fundamentally while still respecting each other's humanity.
This might feel confusing because that’s affording them a lot more respect than we receive from them, but I’m arguing for getting us out of the mess more than fairness. It's easier said than done and takes a lot of patience.
I believe this approach doesn't require compromising our principles, but rather shows confidence in those principles by being willing to examine and discuss them openly. It's telling them: "I arrived at my point of view after examining all the evidence and considering alternate viewpoints, did you?" What are your thoughts on this approach?
I admire you for taking the higher ground. But I have to admit that it’s really hard, because my frustration is not being able to make people see what seems to me to be so outlandishly obvious…
But, believe it or not, the answer is Congress, Congress, Congress, a thousand times! No matter people’s difference of opinions, the Legislative for me is the most important pillar of our democracy. It’s quite simple. I believe we all want the same things—a decent life, with equal opportunities for our kids to have a good education, good jobs, security, etc. Where we all differ in our views is how to get there. We need to overturn Citizens United, we need term limits, end of insider trading, we need Congress to have the same healthcare that we all have, we need laws and government by the people, for the people—to name a few things.
Of course, I wished the media had done a better job educating their audience. In any case, now it’s too late. None of us will be around 250 years from now, to enjoy how (or if) we were able to rebuild our democracy.
I appreciate your kind words about "taking the higher ground," but I want to clarify something - it's not actually about being nice or moral superiority. It's about effective persuasion. When people assume the worst about you, defensiveness or aggression rarely changes minds. It's strategic: the goal is simply getting your point across to someone who might otherwise dismiss you.
You're absolutely right about Congress being the crucial pillar of our democracy. Historically, people did focus too much on the presidency when trying to create change in their lives. The interesting shift we've seen recently is how Republican representatives seem to defer to Trump rather than serve as an independent branch. You’d think Congress is meaningless now, but that's precisely why focusing on Congress is more important than ever - we need to restore its function as a check on presidential power, regardless of who holds office.
Your list of priorities is fantastic - campaign finance reform, term limits, ending insider trading, healthcare reform. Many of these issues, when framed in neutral language that focuses on outcomes rather than partisan talking points, actually have support across the political spectrum. Most Americans want a government that works for ordinary people, even if we disagree on implementation details. That common ground is often where real progress can happen.
I spend a lot of time in these comments (as I know you do too) and people who support Trump are LOCKED IN. They are reading the same Sharon pieces that we are and still choosing erroneous information. I don't think we can appeal to their better angels, because I don't think any of this is about logic or fact. It seems to be about feeling powerful, and feeling superior.
Thanks Ashley, I won't argue against your interpretation because we're talking about something that cannot be proven. But as I was saying elsewhere, I know there are people who voted for Trump for many different reasons, and have their respective connection to Trump. I can't imagine writing off half of the voting public as a lost cause.
I'm not writing off half the public as a lost cause. They are very welcome to join us. I just don't think trying to convince them is a good use of time, when it doesn't seem to be about facts or logic, which Sharon lays out here day after day after day.
I also think it's kind of infantilizing the way we keep being like 'they just need to be educated!" or "we just need to say it right!" They know what they voted for!
Agree with you Ashley. I refuse to infantilize half the American populace. They are living breathing adults with working brains same as you and I. And that is why when the leopards eat their faces, I won’t necessarily be there to listen to the excuses. When folks are ready to join us, we will take any and all helping hands though!
Thanks Ashley and Rachel, I want to make sure we're on the same page because it seems like an important point. I'm talking about Trump voters (people who ended up voting for Trump) and I think you're talking about Trump loyalists, right? I'm picturing someone who doesn't focus on politics much, who reluctantly voted for Trump because they heard mostly negative things about Democrats from their friends and family and Joe Rogan. I think you're picturing someone who votes for Trump and finds some pride in that identity.
I don't think it's infantilizing to ask people why they believe what they believe, and challenge them to explain the contradictions in their logic.
I don’t think it’s infantilizing to ask someone why they voted for a given candidate. What I do think is infantilizing is that Trump voters writ large be given a pass or a “they just didn’t know any better” benefit of the doubt.
I think that’s why so many Harris voters are so dumbfounded. Precisely because we believe those folks to be able minded adults like everyone else.
I can certainly understand that people may have had a deep or shallow understanding of what was at stake in this past election. But a big piece of the persuasion puzzle is allowing people to see things with their own eyeballs. Good and bad. Their own eyeballs are far more persuasive than my words can ever be. That’s why I think it’s more important right now for dems and dem voters to DO good things, rather than verbally trying to persuade. We tried that and it fell very flat.
Thank you, Les! And I agree...to an extent. Blame is a weird concept when you're talking about something so large and abstract as "the media". Can we really say they are a culprit? Because to me that makes it seem like we just have to wait until the system fixes itself, and someday "the media" will learn its lessons and fix itself. It makes it seem like there are just some corrupt individuals making things bad. But just like dark money in elections, it's more like we have built a system that is broken. We keep shaking our fists at traditional media for being biased, but then we select our chosen media outlets based on that bias, baking it in as their revenue structure. Objective, principled journalism is dying except in small, independent organizations that have found niche audiences. And I don't think that the solution is blaming the consumers of the news, either. People have now been conditioned to think that the news should be free of charge.
Perhaps the only way to fix it is for regular people like us to brainstorm ways to correct the root causes and campaign for some reforms, like: make social media companies pay journalists for the content they use to keep their users engage. Repeal Citizens United. Get voters together to make these demands. Easier said than done, but I'm working on something right now that I hope might help people organize these kinds of thoughts into action.
Reforming integrity in information gathering and dispensing is the only way, I think. I honestly don't know how we put that genie back in the bottle, if it ever was in there to begin with. But there has to be some baseline of integrity we create. I don't know how or what that looks like, but it's our only hope.
Yes! "The media" is such a nebulous phrase. It makes me cringe when people say it, especially now in 2025 when there's news media, social media, entertainment media. Anyone can have a podcast, anyone can make a website - there are billions of ways to get information now. Just saying "the media" is so lazy and feels like parroting of Trump's propaganda.
Oh, heck yea. Hypocrisy is not limited to any one political ideology. Biden did so many things I disagreed with. And I found my self agreeing with things he did that were contradictory. Did I love it when I thought about it and realize how myopic I was being? Heck no. It hurts. I was an advanced placement, high performing kid who always wanted to be the smarty pants. I work every single day to overcome that. I think there are two major differences. 1. We do not worship "our" politicians as golden gods. 2. We are willing to call BS. No one who is a true Trump supporter can say those things. I think the one example we might have now is Bernie Sanders. HE runs and rails against the left everyday, so it is an interesting case.
I think that the algorithms and short takes on social media are a huge problem. The human mind seeks easy answers and short, un nuanced videos provide that. I fear that so many humans are not thinking for themselves anymore because it is uncomfortable and they are addicted to the dopamine hits they get that confirm their biases. I know it’s ironic since I am posting on my phone right now but I really need to use my phone as a tool instead of it using me.
I appreciate your passion, Mariza. The frustration is real when you see such contradictions in voters' reasoning. I wonder, though - has the electorate ever truly been universally "smart, well-informed, and able to think"? I don't think people have suddenly gotten less intelligent. What's changed dramatically is our media ecosystem, which has evolved faster than our ability to navigate it critically.
People are swimming in a sea of conflicting information where algorithms feed them content that reinforces existing beliefs. Media outlets have discovered that catering to political biases is profitable, regardless of educational value. The result isn't stupidity but confusion and tribalism. But they aren’t necessarily a lost cause.
I've noticed cognitive dissonance isn't unique to one political side - I catch myself making similar logical leaps when confronted with information that challenges our narratives. Perhaps instead of concluding "we get what we deserve," we might consider how to rebuild information systems that prioritize clarity over confirmation bias?
Part of me thinks that we as Americans need to admit that none of us are experts enough to know how to vote in our own interest. It’s a full time job to keep democracy healthy. Perhaps, if we really wanted to fix this problem, we need to think about something bold, like having people with paid full time jobs to inform voters from the perspective of a peer, as opposed to a journalist or politician. Someone who has the time to attend city council meetings and read the text of the bills being passed. Because I don’t think there’s any possible future where voters who work so many hours per week have the time to accurately vote in their own interest. Instead, they only have time for a TikTok hot take or an advertisement, both of which are now targeted specifically to engineer a response based on data that’s been mined from our internet activity. I don’t think an effective solution exists that won’t be seen as extremely bold. I’ll keep thinking about this today.
Thanks for your reply, Timothy. And thanks for your suggested solutions. Although I agree with your points, there are some basic principles that don’t require a lot of reading… As an example, during the 2016 presidential campaign, I knew very little about Mr. Trump. And of course, I followed the entire campaign because I wanted to hear about the candidates’ differing visions for our country. However, Mr. Trump lost me when he made that comment about Megyn Kelly “bleeding from everywhere” because in my view, a candidate for the highest office in the country simply MUST respect ALL the people he is supposed to protect, defend, and represent. Period. Mind you, everything else he said or did after that, only served to prove my point.
I think you've articulated what many Americans feel - that there are certain baseline standards of respect and decorum we expect from our leaders, especially the president, and any attempt to meet Trump with an open mind has been met with one non-starter after another. You're right that the current president has made zero effort to bridge the divide with those who didn't support him. Instead of seeking reconciliation, he's often chosen to deepen and profit from those divisions, which only reinforces the polarization we're experiencing.
As for those voters who continue to support Trump, I think there's a wide spectrum of reasons. Some people may not be following politics closely. Others might approach politics transactionally - focusing exclusively on policies that directly impact their lives while overlooking character concerns. I’ve heard from people who are horrified by his actions but still voted for him because they have specific circumstances they felt put their family at risk under Democrat policies, and they wished they had the safety net to vote their conscience. Many were raised to prioritize certain issues above all others, and many were raised to view politics through a tribal lens.
While we can certainly hold our own judgments about these attitudes toward politics, I've found that proving people wrong about their perception of you (and the political identity you represent) is more effective than proving them wrong about their chosen side.
When Trump supporters are treated as if they're intellectually or morally deficient, it validates the narrative they've been told - that the opposition is elitist and condescending. This makes them more likely to reject not just you personally, but anyone associated with your political perspective.
On the other hand, when we approach political conversations with genuine curiosity and openness, we challenge those stereotypes. We demonstrate that it's possible to disagree fundamentally while still respecting each other's humanity.
This might feel confusing because that’s affording them a lot more respect than we receive from them, but I’m arguing for getting us out of the mess more than fairness. It's easier said than done and takes a lot of patience.
I believe this approach doesn't require compromising our principles, but rather shows confidence in those principles by being willing to examine and discuss them openly. It's telling them: "I arrived at my point of view after examining all the evidence and considering alternate viewpoints, did you?" What are your thoughts on this approach?
I admire you for taking the higher ground. But I have to admit that it’s really hard, because my frustration is not being able to make people see what seems to me to be so outlandishly obvious…
But, believe it or not, the answer is Congress, Congress, Congress, a thousand times! No matter people’s difference of opinions, the Legislative for me is the most important pillar of our democracy. It’s quite simple. I believe we all want the same things—a decent life, with equal opportunities for our kids to have a good education, good jobs, security, etc. Where we all differ in our views is how to get there. We need to overturn Citizens United, we need term limits, end of insider trading, we need Congress to have the same healthcare that we all have, we need laws and government by the people, for the people—to name a few things.
Of course, I wished the media had done a better job educating their audience. In any case, now it’s too late. None of us will be around 250 years from now, to enjoy how (or if) we were able to rebuild our democracy.
I appreciate your kind words about "taking the higher ground," but I want to clarify something - it's not actually about being nice or moral superiority. It's about effective persuasion. When people assume the worst about you, defensiveness or aggression rarely changes minds. It's strategic: the goal is simply getting your point across to someone who might otherwise dismiss you.
You're absolutely right about Congress being the crucial pillar of our democracy. Historically, people did focus too much on the presidency when trying to create change in their lives. The interesting shift we've seen recently is how Republican representatives seem to defer to Trump rather than serve as an independent branch. You’d think Congress is meaningless now, but that's precisely why focusing on Congress is more important than ever - we need to restore its function as a check on presidential power, regardless of who holds office.
Your list of priorities is fantastic - campaign finance reform, term limits, ending insider trading, healthcare reform. Many of these issues, when framed in neutral language that focuses on outcomes rather than partisan talking points, actually have support across the political spectrum. Most Americans want a government that works for ordinary people, even if we disagree on implementation details. That common ground is often where real progress can happen.
I spend a lot of time in these comments (as I know you do too) and people who support Trump are LOCKED IN. They are reading the same Sharon pieces that we are and still choosing erroneous information. I don't think we can appeal to their better angels, because I don't think any of this is about logic or fact. It seems to be about feeling powerful, and feeling superior.
Thanks Ashley, I won't argue against your interpretation because we're talking about something that cannot be proven. But as I was saying elsewhere, I know there are people who voted for Trump for many different reasons, and have their respective connection to Trump. I can't imagine writing off half of the voting public as a lost cause.
I'm not writing off half the public as a lost cause. They are very welcome to join us. I just don't think trying to convince them is a good use of time, when it doesn't seem to be about facts or logic, which Sharon lays out here day after day after day.
I also think it's kind of infantilizing the way we keep being like 'they just need to be educated!" or "we just need to say it right!" They know what they voted for!
Agree with you Ashley. I refuse to infantilize half the American populace. They are living breathing adults with working brains same as you and I. And that is why when the leopards eat their faces, I won’t necessarily be there to listen to the excuses. When folks are ready to join us, we will take any and all helping hands though!
Thanks Ashley and Rachel, I want to make sure we're on the same page because it seems like an important point. I'm talking about Trump voters (people who ended up voting for Trump) and I think you're talking about Trump loyalists, right? I'm picturing someone who doesn't focus on politics much, who reluctantly voted for Trump because they heard mostly negative things about Democrats from their friends and family and Joe Rogan. I think you're picturing someone who votes for Trump and finds some pride in that identity.
I don't think it's infantilizing to ask people why they believe what they believe, and challenge them to explain the contradictions in their logic.
I don’t think it’s infantilizing to ask someone why they voted for a given candidate. What I do think is infantilizing is that Trump voters writ large be given a pass or a “they just didn’t know any better” benefit of the doubt.
I think that’s why so many Harris voters are so dumbfounded. Precisely because we believe those folks to be able minded adults like everyone else.
I can certainly understand that people may have had a deep or shallow understanding of what was at stake in this past election. But a big piece of the persuasion puzzle is allowing people to see things with their own eyeballs. Good and bad. Their own eyeballs are far more persuasive than my words can ever be. That’s why I think it’s more important right now for dems and dem voters to DO good things, rather than verbally trying to persuade. We tried that and it fell very flat.
I really like the way your mind works. I have believed for some time, that the media is really a culprit in all this. So is dark money
Thank you, Les! And I agree...to an extent. Blame is a weird concept when you're talking about something so large and abstract as "the media". Can we really say they are a culprit? Because to me that makes it seem like we just have to wait until the system fixes itself, and someday "the media" will learn its lessons and fix itself. It makes it seem like there are just some corrupt individuals making things bad. But just like dark money in elections, it's more like we have built a system that is broken. We keep shaking our fists at traditional media for being biased, but then we select our chosen media outlets based on that bias, baking it in as their revenue structure. Objective, principled journalism is dying except in small, independent organizations that have found niche audiences. And I don't think that the solution is blaming the consumers of the news, either. People have now been conditioned to think that the news should be free of charge.
Perhaps the only way to fix it is for regular people like us to brainstorm ways to correct the root causes and campaign for some reforms, like: make social media companies pay journalists for the content they use to keep their users engage. Repeal Citizens United. Get voters together to make these demands. Easier said than done, but I'm working on something right now that I hope might help people organize these kinds of thoughts into action.
Reforming integrity in information gathering and dispensing is the only way, I think. I honestly don't know how we put that genie back in the bottle, if it ever was in there to begin with. But there has to be some baseline of integrity we create. I don't know how or what that looks like, but it's our only hope.
Yes! "The media" is such a nebulous phrase. It makes me cringe when people say it, especially now in 2025 when there's news media, social media, entertainment media. Anyone can have a podcast, anyone can make a website - there are billions of ways to get information now. Just saying "the media" is so lazy and feels like parroting of Trump's propaganda.
Oh, heck yea. Hypocrisy is not limited to any one political ideology. Biden did so many things I disagreed with. And I found my self agreeing with things he did that were contradictory. Did I love it when I thought about it and realize how myopic I was being? Heck no. It hurts. I was an advanced placement, high performing kid who always wanted to be the smarty pants. I work every single day to overcome that. I think there are two major differences. 1. We do not worship "our" politicians as golden gods. 2. We are willing to call BS. No one who is a true Trump supporter can say those things. I think the one example we might have now is Bernie Sanders. HE runs and rails against the left everyday, so it is an interesting case.
I think that the algorithms and short takes on social media are a huge problem. The human mind seeks easy answers and short, un nuanced videos provide that. I fear that so many humans are not thinking for themselves anymore because it is uncomfortable and they are addicted to the dopamine hits they get that confirm their biases. I know it’s ironic since I am posting on my phone right now but I really need to use my phone as a tool instead of it using me.
Check out the book "How to break up with your Phone" by Catherine Price. ILLUMINATING.