EARLY VOTING SURGE: A SIGN OF ENTHUSIASM OR EXHAUSTION?

In the 100 years or so since the start of this presidential campaign, Americans have finally come together as a nation with a common goal: to put this election behind us.

More than 70 million people have voted already, a number that’s 50 percent higher than the total number of ballots cast in the 2016 presidential election.

The patriot in me wants to believe that the surge in early voting indicates a swell of civic engagement. The pragmatist in me thinks that the COVID-19 pandemic is causing people to be proactive, rather than face long lines and unsafe conditions on Election Day.

Either way, the record-setting turnout so far is a flat-out repudiation of voter suppression tactics that were intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of early voting — especially voting by mail.

Way to go America! There’s no pushing you around.

But that might not be the whole story. The pundit in me also suspects that some early voting is due to exhaustion. Now that my ballot has been cast, I can enjoy a brief respite from the polarization that’s consumed the country — tuning out political ads on television and tossing the campaign literature that clogs my mailbox. The exhaustion factor must be off the charts in the so-called swing states, thanks to a constant barrage of political advertising.

As the campaign draws to a close, it’s hard to imagine that anyone has yet to make their presidential pick.

According to Fivethirtyeight’s Nate Silver, on Election Day 2016, about 13 percent of voters were undecided or planned to vote for third-party candidates. But that was a jump-ball election, with no incumbent in the race. In 2012, only 4 percent of voters were undecided between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, by the time voting took place.

Polls suggest that this election is looking more like 2012 than 2016. Before early voting even began, the vast majority of voters said they had already made up their minds and wouldn’t change their decision.

Maybe this is a function of the candidates themselves — or rather candidate, singular. This election is a referendum on the presidency of Donald Trump.

Or maybe it’s a function of our unwillingness to consider anything but a preset narrative. We’ve closed ourselves off from other ideas that may conflict with our closely held beliefs, to prevent feelings of unease or discomfort. This aversion to conflicting narratives prompts us to avoid, explain away, or flat out reject new information.

We’ve all turned into those dreaded parents whose kids are never wrong. You know the type.

Nor can we count on our politicians to go off script and say anything provocative (or even unexpected). In politician school, they must learn these lessons: “Don’t give up any ground. Double down when pushed. Forge ahead.” No wonder our minds have grown numb.

Witness the confirmation hearings for new Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Republican senators lobbed softball questions her way, like asking Barrett to name the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. She could only name four (forgetting the right to peaceful assembly), but it really didn’t matter. Republicans were persuaded to confirm Barrett even before her name was formally submitted.

For their part, Democratic senators tried to get Barrett to reveal her views on matters that are coming before the Supreme Court, like the Affordable Care Act. But the script had already been written: Regardless of the nominee, Democrats were opposed to the confirmation process, as Republicans had reneged on their earlier stance not to consider a vacancy ahead of an election.

The presidential debates were no better. It was easy to predict what Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden would have to say.

In a New York Times column titled “The Shrinking of the American Mind,” opinion writer Roger Cohen said, “Among the words or phrases that were never spoken in the exchanges were: Syria, human rights, democracy, inequality, Israel, Palestine, Middle East, United Nations, World Health Organization, European Union, Britain, Brexit, France, Italy, Hong Kong, Africa, South America, terrorism, or alliance.”

Cohen described the exchanges between Trump and Biden as “petty, petulant and predictable,” indicative of an American society in which constructive debate is nearly impossible. Instead, Cohen said, debate today is more about rival tribes insulting each other. Nobody’s mind is changed by being made to feel stupid.

It’s not about abandoning what we believe in. It’s about throwing out the script and considering new and different ideas. The scope of human thought is vast — and much too valuable to squander.

Dinkin is president of the National Conflict Resolution Center, a San Diego-based group working to create solutions to challenging issues, including intolerance and incivility. To learn about NCRC’S programming, visit ncrconline.com