Readers Write: Presidential election results
Once again, it all came down to a few states.
•••
While the media is emphasizing Donald Trump’s big victory (carrying all seven of the swing states), the election was once again actually close in the states that mattered. A switch of around 15,000 votes in Wisconsin would have had Harris the victor. A switch of around 40,000 votes in Michigan would have had Harris carrying Michigan. A switch of around 68,000 votes in Pennsylvania would have had her carrying that state as well. That totals only around 123,000 votes. Or, if around 245,000 people who did not vote had voted for her in those three crucial states, she would be the president-elect. That is definitely not a blowout election. The election was once again decided by a very small number of voters, as many pundits said would happen.
John Shockley, Minneapolis
•••
Dear President-elect Trump: I wish you well. I had hoped for your resounding defeat, but now, only if you do well can we all do so. I invite you to think about how you will be remembered 50 years from now. On at least one issue, the paths are clear and predictable. If you choose to take climate change seriously, you will be remembered as the leader who guided us through a difficult transition as we weaned ourselves off fossil fuels. If you choose to continue the campaign slogans and serve only the short-term needs of the fossil industry, you will be remembered very differently.
Most assuredly, you will be known for all time as the leader who in a moment of crisis led us down an inevitable path of untold hardship and damage, both domestically and worldwide. Mother Nature and history will not be fooled.
Lawrence Rudnick, Minneapolis
•••
The Minnesota Star Tribune’s kumbaya “nation needs unity” editorial plea rings as hollow as its decision not to endorse: pious twaddle in the face of an existential threat to our democracy (“What the nation needs now is unity,” Nov. 6). Does anyone on the editorial team truly believe that Trump or MAGA-world will embrace any of the recommendations that the board says are “imperative” for them? If not, why mouth such platitudes? The sun is shining today, but in my ninth decade, I have never before felt that we were entering such a dystopian era in the U.S.
George Muellner, Plymouth
•••
Dear Kamala Harris: I need to thank you — and to apologize that we, as a country, failed you. Trump has called us a failed nation and, at least in this election, perhaps he is right.
I cried throughout your concession speech. I cried at the opportunity lost — to be a country of hope and compassion rather than grievance and bitterness. I cried because I was bewildered that my fellow citizens had chosen this dark version of America espoused by a bully trading in lies and insults. I cried for the environment, women’s rights, health care, freedom and democracy. I cried because I knew that I had become “the enemy within.” I cried because if not you, what other woman would ever break “the highest, hardest glass ceiling.”
I will admit there was anger in those tears but, mostly, a profound sadness felt more deeply because of your grace in defeat.
I am grateful for the vision of America that you tirelessly shared with us over the last 100-plus days. I am grateful that you called to our better angels. I’m sorry we didn’t answer. And I want you to know that I did hear your plea to keep fighting, collectively and as individuals, to make the world a better place. I will give myself a day to grieve, and then I will go to work.
Annie Breitenbucher, Minneapolis
•••
There’s a big omission in Ka Vang’s discussion of gender as a factor in Trump being elected president (“The rise of ‘bro culture’ and Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric,” Nov. 7). She blames “bro culture” but makes no mention of the fact that, for the third straight presidential election, a majority of white women voters supported Trump.
If Vang wants to marshal “the power of [women’s] voices” in support of liberal candidates and causes, she would do well to de-emphasize the overused, underscrutinized generalities about the gender gap in voting. Instead, she should open-mindedly explore the factors causing so many white women to support someone who crassly and routinely treats women poorly and speaks about them crudely. I say that as a liberal who’s just as bewildered, saddened and frightened by another Trump presidency as Vang or anyone else.
Steve Schild, Falcon Heights
•••
I have heard so many Trump voters say they like his policies but they don’t like his behavior. Please show us that is true! If you voted for Trump and dislike his behavior, then speak up! When he shows disdain towards women and calls us names, speak up and say that is not OK. When he calls people vermin and uses racially derogatory language, speak up and say that is not OK. When he lies, speak the truth. Speak up for the young women in other states who, because of abortion bans, are dying of untreated pregnancy complications. Speak up for the women who have been raped and who are being forced to carry the resulting pregnancy to term. Speak up for your sisters, your mothers and your daughters. Speak up for the dignity of all people!
Janet Werness, Minneapolis
•••
When faced with a margin of defeat similar to what happened in 2020, it was refreshing to watch Harris admit her loss and graciously concede to her opponent. She did not childishly claim that the other side won because they cheated. She will not propel her supporters to file 60-plus frivolous lawsuits claiming election fraud. She will not inspire them to submit fake slates to the electoral college, and she certainly will not summon a mob to Washington, D.C., tell them to fight like hell and then gleefully watch as they break into the U.S. Capitol. Harris is an adult. I hesitate to imagine what Trump, now armed with immunity, will do to the Constitution, our country and the world during another four years in office.
Mark Brandt, Minneapolis
•••
I do not profess to be a political pundit, just a 71-year-old human being who has witnessed the proverbial ebbs and flows of our election process. I believe the recent presidential election results were less of a mandate for Trump and more our nation’s desire to seek equilibrium. The term “equilibrium” represents a state of calm, and in physics it is defined as a state of balance between two opposing forces. Our country operates best when we debate all sides of the political spectrum and collaborate to serve the best interests of our citizenry.
During the 2024 election campaign many Americans did not feel heard and reacted with their votes for Trump, even though they may have detested his values and divisive mannerisms. Those individuals believed a significant portion of Democratic leadership has migrated too far left. When that happens, regardless of if it is left- or right-leaning, there is a natural tendency to oppose that force. I think that is exactly what happened on Nov. 5, and our political ecosystem sought its natural state of balance. One benefit of legislative equilibrium is that most of the time our financial markets respond favorably to divided government, when we have it, because of a perceived sense of stability.
Both the GOP and Democratic Party should use this opportunity to reflect on their next slate of leaders, positions, policies and respective messaging to ensure that they represent most of us living between the two political extremes. We need candidates that can stand up to their respective parties and be willing to work across the aisle to serve the American people — independent thinkers and problem-solvers who can facilitate balance and harmony even when our democratic process gets messy and contentious.
John Cobb, Lakeville
