Courtesy in Disagreement

No discussion needed, there is the right way and the wrong way to disagree with one another. The great thing about our country and the election process is the principle that all ideas matter. Many people might not share the same perspectives on issues such as same sex marriage, healthcare systems, etc. Different perspectives, and different ways of handling these political disagreements, are prevalent in this divisive time and even in ones own conversations with friends and peers.

During political events, many candidates or their supporters face tricky situations when they are confronted by people who disagree with them. One can find several instances on YouTube where candidates are confronted by loud hecklers who disagree with their policies. At town halls in the Reddest states, more Republicans often faces boisterous members of the audience who shout and interrupt her speeches. One thing I admire a lot about those candidates, no matter how backwards I believe they are, is that they often take the civil route when people interrupt. While those constituents may make valid points, they do not do so in a productive manner. Making an elaborate speech with touching personal anecdotes does not change policy nor encourage the representative to act. The vast majority of the time, no question asked and if it is, the host of the town hall is usually interrupted during his or her response. Comparing the Ted Cruz/Sanders Town Hall vs Tom Cotton’s Town Hall and one can easily see how the perspectives, ideas, and policy issues were much more clearly represented and respected in the former. It is OK to disagree and it is important to make sure a member of congress is acting on the constituents behalf. Honestly thought, it is unclear how asking and answering ones own question at a town hall has any political impact in the country.