Personality nor popularity proves the ability to lead

Election Day will have come and gone, depending on when you read this. The ballots will have been counted (and perhaps re-counted again and again). The political campaigns will have wound down. The pundits will still be pontificating about what it all meant — and what it all means. The victory and concession speeches will have long ended.

And yet, the campaign for the soul of this nation is only beginning. Last year, Pew Research conducted a poll asking Americans to describe politics in the United States these days in a single word or phrase, and an overwhelming majority of Americans (79%) expressed a negative sentiment, with the word “divisive” appearing most frequently among the responses.

One reason is that it’s hard to have civil discourse when we’re focused not on ideas but on personalities. You know, whether we like or dislike how someone talks, their tone or even how someone looks. But when you’re focused on the inconsequential, how can you possibly have any meaningful dialogue on policies, solutions or strategies?

It’s not like any hard data or historical evidence exists substantiating which personality is “best” for leading a nation. But when we discuss ideas, that’s not the case. With ideas, we can look to history and see what policies have worked, which have failed, and, most importantly, which ones made life better or worse for Americans.

And look, if we’re not debating ideas, we’re at risk of becoming lost as a country. Just look at American history and the moments when the nation was at its strongest — when ideas, not personalities, were front and center. Take the American Revolution, for example. That was a moment in history when the ideas of liberty, self-governance and the rights of individuals were fiercely debated and defended. People weren’t focused on the personality of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson but on the ideals that would shape a new nation. And we thank God they were.

Think of the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Those debates weren’t about which candidate was more likable or who had the better quip. They were about the critical issue of the time: slavery. The arguments centered around the moral and economic implications of slavery, and they brought to light the fundamental beliefs that would ultimately drive our country toward the Civil War. Can you imagine if those debates had been reduced to a popularity contest? Instead of arguing critical ideas, what if the nation settled into a fight over who had the better speaking style or was more charismatic? We wouldn’t have had the moral reckoning that we did, and the course of American history could have taken a very different, very troubling turn.

And here’s the kicker: If we let personality drive our political debates, we’re in serious danger of losing more than just effective governance — we’re at risk of losing the unity and civility that come from honest, thoughtful debate. After all, when we debate ideas — no matter how strongly we disagree — we’re engaging with something bigger than ourselves because, in that moment, we’re seeking understanding and what unites us, rather than divides us.

Aristotle once wrote, “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” That’s what civil discourse is all about. It’s the ability to sit across the table from someone with whom you disagree fundamentally and have a respectful debate without feeling threatened, minimized or offended.

Regardless of who won or wins any political contest, we need to get back to discussing ideas that impact our lives and not be distracted by the personalities. Voting based on who “sounds good” or “feels relatable” is like buying a car because you like the color, without ever asking about the engine, gas mileage or whether it can even get you where you need to go.

That’s why, as it is often said, “great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, and small minds discuss people.” As Americans, the question for all of us is whether we want to continue drifting into a space where personality politics rule and “small minds” dominate the discussion.

Or will we choose instead to return our focus to ideas on what really matters, especially for a nation that remains the only one ever founded on an idea in the first place?

Louis R. Avallone is a Shreveport businessman, attorney and author of “Bright Spots, Big Country, What Makes America Great.” He is also a former aide to U.S. Representative Jim McCrery and editor of The Caddo Republican. His columns have appeared regularly in 318 Forum since 2007. Follow him on Facebook, on Twitter @louisravallone or by e-mail at [email protected], and on American Ground Radio at 101.7FM and 710 AM, weeknights from 6 - 7 p.m., and streaming live on keelnews.com.