Seeing both sides

What’s that old Judy Collins song with the line, “I’ve seen both sides now”? That’s how I felt this morning. I had a rational, reasonable discussion with a well-educated, articulate, knowledgeable Republican who’s a Trumper. Is there an oxymoron in there somewhere? More than one? This is a young man (he was born well after the Kennedy assassination, which is a topic that fascinates him) I don’t know well, but he’s dear to someone who is dear to me, so I entered this inadvertently but with every effort to be pleasant. In truth, when I said, “You’re not a Trumper, are you?” I fully expected him to deny it. Instead, he said yes, and I was astounded. Where to take the conversation now?

We fell into this because I brought up the issue of sexual predators and knew my friend would want to talk about it but would agree with me. Her partner and I weren’t too far apart, though he apparently thinks most accusers are lying and that the yearbook sentiment by Roy Moore was forged—I hadn’t heard that but haven’t checked it either. On the other hand, referring to the Franken first accuser, he said photos don’t lie. I pointed out I’d heard the photo was staged, and he moved right on to, “There are other accusers.” He didn’t say much about accusations against the president, but he agrees with me that the sitting president is an uncouth boorish man. He’s willing to put up with that to get the things done the WH occupant wants to do. All along, he had done more research, had more arguments to back him up than I did.

But I think that’s part of the conservative/democrat difference—conservatives are all about hard facts and fail to show any human compassion, to take in the caring side of things, which is part of the principles this country was founded on. The founding fathers were offering people freedom, not building empires.

Then, somehow, we got to immigration, and I was clearly outclassed in argumentative fuel. He had a good grasp of the political tendency of this country for the last twenty-five years. Using Silicon Valley as a example, he talked about companies who terminate employees and tell them, “Your replacement is from India, and you will have to train him/her.” Clearly, cheap labor wins out over patriotic loyalty. It’s not a foolproof argument, but he made me see immigration as an economic issue rather than solely a racial one. And it explains much of what’s happened to our economy.

Of Mexico and the wall, he says the Mexican government is hypocritical, because they have stricter immigration laws than we do and a stronger border on their south, prohibiting immigration from South American countries.

Of outsourcing manufacturing, he says it’s a clear choice: do the patriotic thing, keep your factory here, and go broke because you can’t compete with those who manufacture so much more cheaply overseas or in Mexico. For him, it all comes down to any businessman will do whatever he can to make more money. Patriotism doesn’t enter in, nor does compassion. My verbal opposite says there are provisions in the new tax code that will bring some of that tax revenue to this country.

Our conversation, which had previously been lighthearted and full of laughter, had turned dark, and my good friend ended it when she said, “I’m not enjoying this conversation very much.” Later, she confessed that their darkest moment as a couple had come in a similar discussion. He did not convert me, not as he protested did he mean to, but it was an eye-opening experience.

I cling to the belief that most Trumpers are not as well educated nor as versed on the issues. They vote out of misplaced emotion and, perhaps, anger at “the way things are.”

An interesting breakfast, to say the least.