I am no Mike Stark, but I wanted to share my experience today with a couple of hard core republicans, and my attempts to break through the noise machine and get them thinking.
I often work from a neighborhood coffee shop (free wireless + coffee = instant office) in the mornings. For months, I've watched and listened with interest to two retired men who come in and self-reinforce each other about how all liberals are whackos, discussing every little superficial detail of every news cycle with the official right wing spin and talking points, laughing in derision at everything the democrats have attempted to do and blaming every republican scandal on the lefty media. Straight out of O'Rellyville. (follow me below...)
One of the guys talks so loud that the entire place hears everything he's saying. Most people in this neighborhood probably agree with him, and I've never seen anyone react to his soapboxing. I have bitten my tongue several times reasoning that I am there to work, they are entitled to their discussion over coffee even if they're full of shit, and it doesn't really matter what these guys say to each other - closed loop and all. I've been constantly uncomfortable around them because it feels like they are trying to be provocative, but also realized that me going over to their table and shouting them down wasn't going to accomplish much anyway. Until today that is....
Enter the two men. They get their coffee, and on the way to their table start talking with a women they know. They start talking about how they're phone banking for the Republicans and about how dumb Kerry is. One of they guys starts talking abour the constitutional amendment on the ballot here in Wisconsin to define marriage = man + woman, and to ban dometstic partnerships, etc. "Those gays and lesbians are doing us a favor with this thing! They're pushing the envelope and creating a bunch of republicans!" one guy says.
This was the limit for me. I mean, the right-wing proponents of the 'marriage amendment' have twisted this thing already into just being about gay marriage when it's much broader than that, and the whole premise of a constitutional amendment to limit someone's rights is wrong-headed to begin with. But this guy was now saying that the amendment was origniated by the gays and lesbians so they can marry so you really need to go out and show them by voting against it. I could not stand it.
To keep my head from exploding, I interrupted and said as calmly as possible "you know that the amendment was not originated by gays or lesbians, right? It is a referendum put on the ballot by the state republicans to energize the republican base so they'll come out and vote." The other guy says, "he's right 'brad' it's not from the left. But we do have these activist judges we have to stop... blah blah blah enter talking points". 'Brad' is stunned; he really thought those gays had cooked this up to 'push the envelope'. I said "same sex marriage is already against the law in Wisconsin so there's no need for the amendment for that purpose. It's just to get out the vote for the republicans". Brad, smiling: "Well, it's working isn't it?" Both launch into their opinions on gay marraige. I said "you know, you're entitled to your opinions, and I've heard 'em for months in here, but I just wanted to correct your facts about what the amendment is about."
They sat down at their table, next to mine, and talked about real estate and the new mall in town. They were much quieter. I don't think they are faced with opposing views much and they were acting more humble at that point.
As for me, I was about to storm out in disgust and give a parting shot, like I often do when I'm around bigots. Real mature I know, but you've been there. But dammit why should I leave, just because they're there?
It occurred to me that arguing over current politics, let alone stuff in the current news cycle is not going to get anywhere with them. What might get through to them is being faced by a real live non-whacko reasonable democrat and maybe, just maybe realizing that we're not all the stereotype that they've been programmed to believe. That would be a start.
So I walked over to their table and apologized for interrupting their conversation earlier. I think they were relieved that I wasn't going to launch into them again so they said really, it's ok, we don't mind a good discussion on this stuff. I proceeded to sit down and shoot the shit with them for about an hour. Every time they tried to bring up something superficial like the Kerry thing I would just redirect to the fact that nobody is talking about the substantive issues - our over consuming lifestyle in America and commensurate debt spending, our dependence on other countries for oil and need for energy independence (which I framed as real national security), that oil is not going to matter a whole hell of a lot when the water runs out (environmental concerns), that all of us are going to have to make some sacrifices to get us out of this situation etc. They agreed with all of this, being old enough to remember WWII. Whenever they brought up some minor example of liberals being 'nutty' on this or that, or otherwise stared to go down a non-productive path, I reiterated that most of what we're fed in the news is entirely superficial - the above are the real issues that need to be discussed. Once they were on board with what the 'real' issues were, we could all agree that much of what Bush and his congress have done has certainly not helped anything. Eventually, they toned down the rhetoric, and I think they ended up feeling that we're not so different after all.
There was more positive about this but I'm going on too long already. The main point is below.
I don't think I changed the way they're going to vote next week, but I think I did accomplish breaking down their stereotype of the 'loony left' just a little. It's easy for them to sit there morning after morning in their own bubble and cast aspersions, but when faced with a reasonable person who happens to disagree with them on solutions, I think I planted a seed, made a crack in the wall. And I think I will get farther with them next time because we had a real conversation consciously looking for points of substance that we agreed on instead of getting into a pitched non-productive argument in full defense mode. Obviously, some people wake up in full defense mode will not give an inch, and there is no point wasting time on them. However, I think there is value in at least trying to open the dialogue.
Sorry if this doesn't particularly help with election issues, but I found some hope in this conversation and wanted to share the experience with you.