Finding our way in the brutal world of politics

When my boys were young, they’d have long, occasionally heated discussions about history, politics, religion, science, you name it. Sometimes they’d ask for my opinion – especially when they wanted me to declare one of them right. Invariably, I’d point them in a third direction, toward something they’d both missed. They’d be off to the races again.

Our world does have absolutes, right and wrong, true and false. Yet so many issues and ideas we wrestle with are not either-or. We look through a glass darkly. Politics is a prime example.

I don’t know about you, but I’m one of those people who feels left out when political choices are binary. After all, such narrow options leave a lot of valuable perspectives on the table and make for awkward combinations. I’ll take this but without that, please.

Election cycles are a case in point. Out of all that matters to me in the public space, Candidate A agrees with me on this critical concern, but is way off on that one. Candidate B and I agree on a lot, but one position is a nonstarter for me. Candidate C aligns with me on a key issue, but not quite.

There was a time when most voters aligned with either of the two major parties. Lately, though, independents or nonaligned voters have become the largest block. And for good reason.

There was a time when the two main parties were big tent parties – over time they became more exclusive. The Democrats kicked out the Blue Dog Dems. Then the GOP pushed out the so-called RINOs. The big tent approach folded.

There are always the options of voting split ticket, third party/nonparty, or switching parties to vote in the primaries from time to time. The switching party option is especially helpful in states dominated by one of the two major parties where the real contest is in the primaries.

At best, third party candidates tend to be spoilers, given our political structure. The last time a third party won the White House, the nation was barreling toward civil war with one of the two major parties hopelessly divided and the other disintegrating never to rise again.

More often than not, we are stuck with choosing the least offensive candidate. We vote more against one than we vote for the other. Never a very satisfying feeling.

We can always leave ballot boxes blank – none of the above. Strategically easier in a state where your vote won’t count anyway because of the Electoral College.

Politics is always a matter of compromise. You don’t get agreement between two or more people without it. A democracy is about working with those with whom you disagree, finding whatever common ground you can.

In the big tent approach, a lot of compromising goes on inside each of those two tents before each tent then finds common ground with the other tent in order to get something done. Although the big tent approach is a bit passe, you can still see intraparty compromises going on today in the slimmed-down tents. There is no way a handful of people can win over the rest of the nation without finding common ground with a lot of people different than themselves.

The alternative is the bully approach – burn the whole house down and rule over the ashes. Down with democracy, restore power to the people, and all that mixed messaging. Such voters think – wrongly – that an authoritarian will have the common person’s best interest in mind. History shows us bullies give increased power to some of the people, leaving all others voiceless. And “some of the people” usually means a ridiculously small group of cronies.

In today’s politics we have a math problem. Candidates win by as little as 51% and call it a mandate. They call it a mandate even if they win with less than 50% of the popular vote.

We also have a vocabulary problem. Take the word “most”.  When you say you had the most to eat of all the people sitting at the table, you mean you had five meatballs when everyone else had four or less.

When you say, “Most everyone at the table likes me,” you mean something very different. Out of ten people at the table, maybe 1 or 2 don’t like you. Creates a hung jury, but otherwise you are a likeable person.

So what does most mean in an election? With 51% of the votes, you have the most meatballs, but it doesn’t mean most people like you.

You win an election if you have more votes than anyone else, but a plurality or a majority of 51% does not a mandate make. But with 51% you need your certificate in compromise training and your badge in “how to win over those who didn’t vote for you.”

Wyoming women voting in 1920 (public domain photo, photographer unknown)

Perhaps surprisingly, I’m not totally bummed out by our present situation. When people talk about the current election (pick any of the elections in this century) as being the most important election ever, I think they must not have studied U.S. history back in school. It is hard to beat the 1860 presidential election for consequence and drama. And a handful of other runners-up also come to mind.

Without doubt, this election cycle is consequential; they all are. This election will once more test our constitution’s durability – as they invariably do.

But when we think everything is at stake, we act as if we can never work out a deal with the opposition. Rare are the positions that require such high stakes. Even when they do, passion cannot trump our character and witness as we work to find a solution, as limited as our options might be.

So, given our less-than-ideal situation, what do we do?

1. Find candidates who value your opinion even when it counters theirs.

I have a better chance of making my opinion known to local candidates, but I hope that those on the national level will also listen to perspectives that are different than their own. There is no way my congresswoman can represent the priorities of everyone in her district. Yet I trust she’s willing to listen to those who disagree with her, maybe even didn’t vote for her. I trust she won’t disparage those who oppose her, and instead will work to find common ground with voters and members of Congress on the other side of the aisle.

I’ve met political leaders I can work with because they are willing to listen to me. They may not vote or decide the way I want them to, but I know they will hear me out.

One state legislator I knew told me that direct constituent feedback was often nonexistent. While he generally stuck to his party position, he said even a few constituents coming to him with their common frame of mind could change his.

I tried that on another state legislator, appealing to him about something that concerned me very deeply. His response was that he was hearing the voices of a thousand others in the opposite direction. When I asked him if they were constituents, he admitted they were not. I voted against him in the next election.

2. Choose candidates who are people of character, if you can find them.

Maybe you know the candidate personally, especially if it is a local election. And from what you know, they are a person of good character, regardless what others have to say about them.

What do you do when you don’t know the candidate personally? You listen to observers you have come to trust. You listen to what others think who have known the candidate firsthand – even worked directly with her. And you listen to those who have differing opinions. Then you sort out all the perspectives – and pray for guidance.

Most importantly, we dare not forget that we and our own perspectives are fallible as well. Only God sees what is truly in the heart.

3. Remember how you speak about candidates and leaders is all part of your witness as a believer.

We are called to follow the Golden Rule – even when speaking of political opponents. When all is said and done, our political conversations will either betray or confirm our own good character – and far more importantly, our witness to the One we serve.

Ask yourself:

I really didn’t mind my boys staking out separate territories on opinions they were discussing. I just didn’t want their conversations to get to the point where their differences caused a rift. The same is true when it comes to me relating to my relatives, my fellow worshippers at church, my neighbors. I always want to leave a door open for further conversation with everyone, including my political opponents. And I don’t want to send the wrong message about my faith.

4. Let your light shine so well in the political realm that those who disagree with you will see your good works and glorify your God in heaven.¹

This principle works in any type of political reality. Ours happens to be a democracy (a democratic republic, to be precise), which means that we have the opportunity to speak out – and vote. We bear responsibility for letting our light shine in how we do just that.

Being a Christian in any society means finding our way to let our light shine in whatever political structure we find ourselves. For those of us in a democracy, that means we:

1. Make room for those with whom we disagree. Democracy is about inclusivity, making sure everyone can vote, making sure unique voices are heard, even when they don’t fit with ours. As people of faith, we make a difference for good when we make our system more inclusive.
2. Find ways to work together with those who oppose us. Democracy is about working together, despite our differences. When short on apparent common ground, we work to uncover common ground.
3. Use our voice – and vote – prophetically to speak the truth in love. In a democracy, we are given a voice. How we choose to use it must be governed by our faith.

For years, I lived in a part of the world where democracy was in short supply. For much of that time, I worked closely with government officials diametrically opposed to my faith as well as to the values of my homeland. But beyond what was publicly stated, we still found common ground to work with. I came to respect them – as I believe they did me.

Returning to the U.S., I landed a job with a nonprofit that shared some of my values, but not all. When they learned I was Pentecostal, they asked me how I could work with them. To which I replied with a twinkle in my eye, “I’ve worked with Communist Party officials; I can work with anyone.”

5. Work toward the good in whatever political system you find yourself.

Our U.S. system is not perfect, but neither is any other that humans have devised; some systems allow for goodness to thrive better than others. That said, the polarizing climate we find ourselves in does nothing to advance the aims of the Good News.

Much can be done to cure the polarizing nature of our society and political environment. This post is not about changing the system; it’s about changing the perspectives of those who run for office, for those who run the parties, for those who vote, and most importantly for those of us who call ourselves followers of Jesus.

To help you as you work toward these goals, you are invited to subscribe to this twice-weekly post – for free!

---

1. Taken from Matthew 5:16. ↩︎