Every once in a while I have what I call a clarifying moment. These are the times when a particularly complex and ambiguous issue suddenly takes on a new form and things begin to make sense. Other's may call these AH HA! moments or inspiration. I've been feeling a lot of ambiguity and confusion during this election cycle. This morning's revelation condensed around something which I actually find compelling about Donald Trump's campaign platform; the idea that America has been and can be great.
One of the core tenants of Design Thinking is that you should test your premises. In this case the premises are that America was once great, isn't now, but can be again if we just elect Donald Trump for president.
Let's do some premise testing; I happen to think that America has been a pretty great place, largely because of it's people and the rules that they chose to govern themselves by. I also think America has done a lot of good in the world. (At the same time I acknowledge that we haven't always gotten it right the first time and have made mistakes.)
Another part of the Design Thinking framework is that you want to be solving the real problem. So in this case we have to ask some more questions, like; What is/are the real problems in this situation?
On the surface the situation is that it's time for an election. We do that on a regular schedule because The Constitution says we should. (The Constitution is a subject for another day.) The Constitution does not address how to control or regulate who decides to run for office. BTW, that's another great thing about America, anybody can volunteer to run for public office. Apparently the Founding Fathers felt that the people were smart enough to figure out which candidates were up to the job via the election process.
This is where another element of the situation becomes important. Our voting system has a couple of rules having to do with how differences of opinion are resolved. One is that the majority rules. Sometime majority is simply defined as the highest number of votes - a simple majority. Other times a larger number of votes (eg; a 2/3 Majority) or that a large enough percentage of the population must be present to vote. (a quorum.)
Another element relates to the nature of choice. Diversity of opinion implies complication. Tolerance implies accommodation. Ideal solutions address everyone's concerns, not just 50% plus one.
Which brings us back to the question of what truly has made, makes and could continue to make America great. For that we don't have to look any further than what happened in Orlando last week in the wake of three horrible tragedies; Ordinary Americans generously responded with openness and compassion. They looked past the differences and shared of their abundance, even if it was a widow's mite in the form of their own blood.
That is what truly makes America great. When confronted with crushing disaster and destruction we respond compassionately. We did it in World War II. We did it in response to Katrina, We did it on 9/11. We do it all over the world because we care about others needs and in those times we reach into our cupboards and our souls and find something that each can contribute to restoring safety, peace and order to the lives of others.
Yes, at other times we may fight and squabble amongst ourselves about hundreds of things, large and small, but underneath it all we remember what it feels like to be cold and tired, hungry and alone and we respond.
That, Mr. Trump, is what really made and Makes American Great. By the way, I like your "platform" of Making America Great. I even like some of your ideas from Time to Get Tough. What I don't like is how I think you'd try to accomplish them - which brings me to my last point;
Maybe its time to reform America's election process. We need a way to say None of these Options are Acceptable. We need to stop assuming that a simple majority solution is good enough. We need to stop assuming that 50% of 60% is enough of a mandate to influence national policy or filling the role of someone as influential as POTUS. Maybe we should view those un-cast ballots as NO's rather than What-evers. I'd be pleased to see a ballot that doesn't reduce my voice to single bit binary.
I also want a public policy process that doesn't punt when things are complex and ambiguous.
Another note to Donald; Thank you for contributing your ideas. I actually agree with the goals of many of them. I just don't trust you to execute them in the way that actually makes and keeps America Great.
