Yes, rural poverty is a thing and we should provide compassion and assistance to everyone trying to escape it. But that's not the family described in the article (who clearly did have the resources to visit DC), and it's not what swung the election. Trump got the votes of a huge number of middle-class, older white people, who have had many opportunities to venture out of their bubbles, to get to know their country better, to reach out to immigrants and the vulnerable in their own communities, and have just never bothered.

We should hold ourselves to a higher standard, and work to empathize with the "cultural anxieties" driving rural Trump voters, just as they have never worked to understand the anxieties of their coastal/urban counterparts, let alone those of blacks, Muslims, and other persecuted minorities. But we shouldn't idolize them as "real America". They are a part of it, yes, but the real America is a much bigger, more diverse and welcoming place.

This is exactly it. Small-town America is a very different beast from suburban America. Most small town residents tend to pride themselves on their self-sufficiency ... which is, of course, contingent upon being able to gas up and drive to the nearest "city" (max population: 40,000) a couple times a month for necessary provisions from the big box stores.

Lisa Ling[1] did a great piece where she interviewed people in the largest Radio-Free Quiet Zone[2]. The high-schoolers she talked to spent more time talking about how different (and better) they were from "city people", a fact they were quite proud of.

.. _1: http://www.cnn.com/shows/this-is-life-with-lisa-ling

.. _2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Radio_Q...

I know people keep turning to hard data to try to explain the election. I think that's generally the right way to look at it. However, I think we all know people who have supported Trump. I feel like we should be sharing what they're thinking respectfully, even though it's feels more than likely many of his supporters would not reciprocate, however true or not true that may be. More viewpoints is better after all, right? They perceive us as aloof and disconnected from their problems. So, what do we do?

I don't want another election like this more than anyone else does, but it will happen again if something doesn't change. I have little faith in the protests ability to change people's minds. The people they need to talk to likely have never even been to the streets they're protesting on. All they're going to hear is that the protests in Oregon were deemed a riot and dispersed, and that will be that.

Within my family, not all voted for Trump, but most did and they come from different economic strata. So, I've seen multiple viewpoints on this. I think in order for me to understand the elections, I've made a separation between: 1.) economics, and 2.) race & culture. The people I know that voted for Trump might have responded to the dog whistling (can it really be called that when it's so unsubtle?). But, in their minds it's about 1. and not 2. I think when it comes to changing hearts, the only thing that matters is how you feel, so it's important to make that distinction. They don't see themselves as fomenting racial anxiety, even though the United States is inevitably becoming a more diverse place. They only care about the economy, and Trump made a point of opposing trade pacts that have hollowed away their traditional place in American society.

At home and at work, I feel like I occupy two totally different worlds that don't interact with each other at all. I come to work, and it's nice. It's a diverse workplace, people are kind, we're making money. It's nice. Then I go home and it's like 2008 is rumbling on. It really does feel to me like people don't humanize people they disagree with anymore because they filter their world through cable news & the internet. Maybe changing that might help change this?

But how do we do talk to them? To them it sounds like we're waiting for them to die off, which is profoundly insulting to them but also not true of us, or at least not of me. We aren't waiting for them to die off. To me, or us, it sounds like they're trying to turn back the clock on the progress we've made for a lot of people who have endured a lot of hurt. But to them, they're trying desperately to preserve a way of life. But the world is just changing around them. We're all uncertain about where we're going to from here.

So how do we talk to them about it? How do we make them not feel threatened? I'm really at a loss. I think it's hard for the left (or at least me) to appreciate how divergent our understanding of what constitutes racist/sexist behavior is from theirs too. What's unacceptable behavior to me is locker room talk or just crude humor to them. It's hard for me to not lose my temper about it. I'm not sure how to shrink the empathy gap between the two sides, but I don't see these conversations taking place, so somebody has to start, right? But how do we do it?

I know this is a difficult pill to swallow because it involves entreating people who frighten or even mean ill to our friends (or ourselves). I happen to be in a position of extreme privilege so this post is a little too easy for me to write. Consulting with people I disagree with presents no threat to me. Others definitely will not have that experience. I don't mean to suggest that people who feel at risk should try it. But I feel like there's not a whole lot of options available to me right now. I don't want my country to tear itself apart in two or four years from now. I'm really at a loss here as to what's the best way forward for everyone, and for the country.

Regarding my being moved to tears, I offer you my sincere apology, I'll certainly try and "man" up to keep my emotions from bothering you.