Before Election Day, we read an article in class; Mickey Edwards writes about the potential outcome of the election and how the candidates should respond. He emphasized that the losing candidate must accept defeat and support the other side in order to unite the nation.
In response, I wrote: “How does the loser’s support help unite the nation? With the extreme personalities of both parties and the persistent insults thrown back in forth, a sudden acceptance of the opposing candidate would seem unrealistic and fake. Despite the losing candidates “supporting” words, it seems unlikely that the other side will give in and unite with the other side.
Now that the elections are over and Donald Trump is the new president of the United States, Hillary Clinton is (by method of deduction), the loser. Her acceptance speech was very eloquently phrased, thanking her supporters and friends while congratulating Trump.
She acknowledges that Trump is the new president and congratulates him, however, there is a tone of uncertainty in her speech that leads to the assumption that she does not think Trump will be a good president. Her speech had lines such as “I know how disappointed you feel, because I feel it too” and “Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead.” It seems that she already knows he is going to be a bad leader, but feels obliged to tell the audience to give him a chance.
It seems as though the two sides are even more separated than before. With the hashtag “#notmypresident” floating around the web, videos and stories of conflict and violence, and angry rants of dissatisfaction, who knows how this term will turn out?