•••
Postelection letters seem to reflect the general public discourse I hear. One side is distraught, horrified and, among other things, interprets the presidential election as evidence that racism and misogyny still rule the day. The other side says that’s bogus and unfair — they voted on a range of issues, beginning with the economy and immigration. Fair enough.
But here’s the thing, and the heart of the reason I believe we’re talking past each other: Donald Trump threw hateful mud at Kamala Harris using repugnant gender and race stereotypes — both at rallies and on social media. That is a deal-breaker for a lot of us. It reveals a mean-spirited, offensive man who dishonors the office of president and portends a future of fear and grief for those who are presumed “different” from the majority in power. Once president, especially given Trump’s prowess in using a megaphone, these supremacist sentiments become official national values that dictate policy.
Forget the issues — that Trump’s hatefulness is not a deal-breaker for a majority of Americans is the rub for me, and I think many others. I, for one, would do my utmost to listen with an open mind to a reasoned response that is more than canned talking points.
Rich Cowles, Eagan
•••
In the Star Tribune’s Nov. 13 Readers Write (”Crying sexism is a lazy analysis”), a reader wrote that the Trump victory over Harris could not have been due to sexism because voters chose female candidates (such as Sen. Amy Klobuchar) over male candidates in nonpresidential races.