Whoever wins, we’ll still be polarized. What can an average person do about it?

Ever since Donald Trump launched his first campaign for president, his appeal has mystified me, and I’ve seldom passed up articles attempting to explain it. A particularly chilly theory was offered by The Atlantic’s Tom Nichols. Trump’s supporters want him to be “terrifying and stomach-turning,” Nichols said, to “horrify people both they and Trump hate.” No despicable behavior on Trump’s part, and nothing Kamala Harris says or does, will change their feelings.

I was tempted to compose a post saying that the feeling is mutual. 

Then, attending church nine days before the election, I heard a sermon about charity toward those on the other side of the political divide. 

The United States is more polarized today than in half a century, according to the Pew Research Center, and the polarization is not only ideological but also personal. “Democrats are awful people,” a Trumper told me when I was phone calling for Harris. Claiming the left doesn’t also use invective would be a lie. 

Trump deserves blame for fueling the hatred, but blaming him doesn’t help overcome it. No matter who wins the election, our toxic political situation will remain. 

In all honesty, I enjoy feeding my disdain for Trump. My attention during the campaign has been on how loathsome Trump and his running mate JD Vance are. I liked the daily posts of Trump’s estranged niece Mary Trump because she doesn’t hold back on scathing adjectives for her uncle. I admire her courage but decided to unsubscribe.

The next time I’m tempted to start railing about Trump, maybe I can pause and think of something else to talk about. A friend who had been out of town and I were catching up on the phone. After she filled me in on her trip, she said it was my turn to talk, “but let’s not talk about Trump.” She has the right idea. 

Living in a blue city and interacting with like-minded friends, I’ve not had to engage with the other side. I don’t have any conservative friends in Chicago, and the few Republicans I know out of town are anti-Trump. I haven’t tried to make a conservative friend, haven’t even wanted to spend time with a conservative friend of a friend. I’ve stereotyped Republicans as uncompassionate bigots. Avoiding them is not the way to test the stereotype.

If not having in-person discussions, at least I could pay attention to media views that don’t agree with mine. I ignore them most of the time. For instance, I skipped a recent Chicago Tribune editorial opposing the millionaire’s tax for which I’d already voted. I subscribe to the Flip Side, a daily digest of liberal and conservative views, but rarely read the conservative side. I might be surprised to find reasoned arguments there. 

These thoughts apply to local politics, too. Instead of berating Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson as an autocrat, I should criticize his positions, such as his opposing the majority will about ShotSpotter and his prioritizing the Chicago Teachers Union over the whole city.

To be clear, we should oppose policies with which we disagree. We should condemn name-calling and racism, but we needn’t return hate for hate. This is about depersonalizing the discussion, focusing on issues and not personality. 

Politicians and the media have to tone down the vitriol; ordinary citizens can’t do it alone. Research has found that most Americans want an end to unhealthy polarization. That’s many millions of people who, if we make attempts in our own circles, might have an effect.