Morning-after political pundits are tripping over themselves in their attempts to explain why the Democrats (and democracy) fared so poorly in the 2024 elections. They needn’t bother.
The fault lies, as with most of our cultural conflicts, at the mud-caked, strapped and buckled, black-leather footwear of our well-meaning but inexperienced and ill-informed Founding Fathers.
It’s ironically titled the Bill of Rights, and everything from our mass shooting epidemic to the complete corruption of our representative states and courts can be traced back to these unwittingly written roots.
When a government allows politicians and licensed media outlets to lie profusely and without consequence per the “freedom of speech” word salad in said Bill of Rights, it does its constituency a grievous disservice and hastens its own demise.
The convening of a Constitutional Convention to correct the outdated and poorly thought-out idiocies we labor under is long past due, and these self-inflicted ills will continue to divide us until we do.
— Alexander Graham Glanville, Rockledge, Florida
Time for us to work together
As Americans, we have a birthright to elect our leaders that people in some other countries have never enjoyed. This right was fought for centuries ago, and brave men gave their lives to create a country in which there was no repression from the government concerning our religious and political beliefs.
In the last 100 years, many other rights have been granted to the lucky citizens of the United States.
The election on Nov. 5 has caused elation for many people and despondency for others. This election cycle, more than any other I have witnessed, has caused divisiveness among a lot of Americans. Terrible things were said about the good people on different sides of the political fence who were only exercising their First Amendment privilege to express their opinion.
The best thing for America right now is for both sides to strike a conciliatory tone.
We have met on the political battlefield, and a victor has been proclaimed.
But it is now time to sheath our swords and work together as a monolithic society to further the success of our beloved country.
— Hayward Simpson, Lake City, Florida
Editorial board is disconnected
The editorial “Trump’s win was a stunning repudiation of the chattering classes” (Nov. 7) is disconnected from election reality. The Tribune Editorial Board analysis is problematic on several levels.
“Chattering class” is a Republican term designed to smear deeply passionate progressive advocates for a more supportive, inclusive and democratic society. It feeds into the Republican agenda to portray supporters of lower- and middle-class advancement as out-of-touch elites. Calling assistant deans, network anchors, public health officials and newspaper journalists “liberal elites” is an ad hominem insult not worthy of seeing print.
The editorial board’s characterization of Kamala Harris’ agenda to uplift society is false. I heard her speeches that laid out in concrete terms her economic plan to grow middle- and working-class wealth with tax incentives to purchase their first home. Many economists blasted Donald Trump’s plan of tax cuts for the wealthy and massive tariffs that would goose the national debt and cost working families. His plan is projected to cause the national debt to balloon by as much as $7 trillion.
Democratic leaders, faced with a difficult choice once President Joe Biden dropped out of the race in July, made a sterling choice. Harris, an insider to the presidency for 3 1/2 years at Biden’s side, was eminently more qualified than any other choice. She rewarded her selection with a passionate, spirited and common-sense campaign that shamed Republicans for choosing a convicted felon, who tried to overturn his 2020 defeat allegedly by using mob action that led to the injuries of more than 100 police who were protecting American democracy. Yet, the editorial board mentions none of that in its rush to degrade Harris’ principled campaign.
Harris did not abandon “the working class, especially men, by deeming so much of what they felt was unacceptable.” Speaking honestly and intelligently, she did not get herself “on the wrong side of the numbers game.” It was Trump who got on the right side of the numbers game with abusive, profane and disgraceful rhetoric never before heard in a presidential campaign. It was so offensive that one not enamored of it needed a shower afterward.
The editorial board might benefit from reviewing Harris’ eloquent speeches and the incoherent ramblings of Trump impersonating an overserved blowhard in a bar.
Then offer a revision on the election connected to reality.
— Walt Zlotow, Glen Ellyn
GOP is the party of the rich
The editorial “Trump’s win was a stunning repudiation of the chattering classes” states that “the Republican Party has become a party not of business and nonprofit leaders, now mostly Democratic Party members, but of the working class and the lower middle class.” Wasn’t it billionaire business leaders such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel who financed the election of Donald Trump and JD Vance? The Republican Party has always been and still is the party of rich businessmen.
The editorial board suggests that the Democrats abandoned the working class. I saw no evidence of that in any of the speeches I heard from Joe Biden, Kamala Harris or Tim Walz. The board also states that “regular folks tend to vote what they perceive to be in their economic or cultural interest, regardless of race.” That statement is the most accurate part of the editorial. The Republican Party did a great job of convincing voters that it would help them. The No. 1 issue in exit polls was the economy, even though it is now in great shape. Inflation is now at a normal 2.1%, but interest rates and housing prices are still high, and the high inflation caused by the pandemic was very painful.
Prove me wrong. I challenge the editorial board and readers to name one law passed in the last 50 years that was written by Republicans, passed by a majority of Republicans in Congress and signed by a Republican president that chiefly benefited the poor and the middle class. I don’t think one exists.
— John Regan, Lemont
The editorial board is wrong
Way to go, Tribune Editorial Board.
The board chose to run a postelection editorial that not only mixes fact with fiction but also insults the Tribune’s loyal readers.
I asked myself: Who the heck are the chattering classes? Oh, the board defines that in the first sentence: They are the “liberal elite.” Now I also see that the board means me.
I don’t despise Donald Trump because, as the board infers, I’m “highly educated.” I despise Trump because he’s a compulsive liar and convicted felon who lost an election but refused to leave office and tried to overthrow the government by allegedly orchestrating a violent insurrection he now claims was actually “a day of love.”
Isn’t that enough?
I’d cancel my Tribune subscription but won’t because of all the fine journalism by its staff — writers such as Ray Long, Rick Pearson, A.D. Quig, Alice Yin, Clarence Page, Jason Meisner and myriad others. (Here’s looking at you, Michael Phillips and Nina Metz.)
To echo the last line of the editorial, now I “better understand” that the editorial board is Fox News in sheep’s clothing.
— Leslie G. Ladd, Chicago
Editorial board is out of line
The editorial describing Donald Trump’s win as a “repudiation of the chattering class” is out of line. Trump’s behaviors from 2016 to the present were disqualifying. There was no need for the Tribune Editorial Board to resort to a pejorative. It is the editorial board of a great American newspaper. Have you no moral compass? The board should have been continuously explaining to the electorate that we have the right to expect our leaders to be honest and virtuous, for concrete, demonstrable reason. This is not a partisan proposition.
Why did the editorial board swallow a firehose of Trump and Vance’s lies without vigorous and repeated protests? It was guilty of “normalizing” and “sane-washing” this behavior. Those terms should not have had to come from the Democrats. The Tribune Editorial Board and others in the news media should have stepped up from the beginning of the demagoguery and described it for what it was. Then, there would have been no need for Democrats to use those terms.
The editorial board’s assertions that party bosses tried to “push” Harris on the nation and that Americans have never cared for that type of action are false. Consider Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower — each rose with strong party backing and was widely accepted by the public.
The board’s assertion that the Republican Party is now the party of the working class and the lower middle class — who uses that term anymore? — is, likewise, false. Try telling that story to Elon Musk, the Koch brothers, Stephen Schwarzman, Peter Thiel, the Uihleins and many other billionaires.
They will laugh in your faces.
— Robert A. Weisman, Chicago
Only Democrats are concerned?
The editorial in response to Donald Trump’s win states: “And, adding insult to injury for Democrats, it’s likely that the result of the election also will deliver Trump from his myriad legal challenges.”
For Democrats? Does the Tribune Editorial Board think only Democrats are concerned that the Republican candidate was charged with myriad criminal offenses? Surely, the criminal challenges, as the board so cavalierly puts it, of the president-elect of the United States should be of concern to every resident of our nation.
— Linda Erf Swift, Chicago
Fourth brand of government
I highly value the Tribune’s editorial team and work. Journalism truly is the fourth branch of government, watching our local politics and calling out the fouls.
I value the Tribune newsroom’s election analysis and the Tribune Editorial Board’s endorsements and use them to inform my vote.
In the future, with the prevalence of early voting, can the Tribune publish the analyses and endorsements before early voting starts?
— Kathleen Wall, Chicago
Don’t overlook voter turnout
As a voter, we should better understand the results of the 2024 election: Donald Trump’s vote count of 2024 was within 1 million of the 2020 results of 74 million. Kamala Harris received about 12 million fewer votes than Joe Biden in 2020 — 81 million versus 69 million. Her failure to win was not the result of Trump’s popularity but of the many voters who failed to let their vote be counted.
A simple analysis is that it was not as much a switch to favor Republicans or Trump but the lack of voter turnout.
— Raymond Hubbard, Sandwich
The main reason is obvious
The reason Donald Trump won the election is because he is a white man who ran against a woman, especially a Black woman.
The majority of those who voted for Trump didn’t vote for him because of the economy, immigration, abortion, etc. Who do they think they are fooling?
Now we have to live the next four years with a convicted felon in the White House. God help us.
— Gretchen Gerdes, Crestwood
This fact is not a surprise
In the morning-after opinions offered by men in the media, not one of them mentioned the ugly reason embedded in background as to why Kamala Harris lost: misogyny.
Considering how many women have been elected mayor of Chicago or governor of Illinois, that fact should not come as a total surprise.
— Len Robertson, St. Charles
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
