Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The answer to the question in this blog headline could be “yes.”

That’s the contention of a writer, Cleve Woodson, Jr., whose work appeared in the Washington Post under this headline:  “Repeated violence puts spotlight on divisive political speech.”

Here is how his column started:

“Scholars who study rhetoric and extremism say the country’s political language has grown more aggressive and can trigger violent acts.

“For years, President Donald Trump has relied on insults, menace and combative political language as central features of his public persona — portraying opponents as enemies, critics as threats and political fights as existential battles for the country’s survival.

“After multiple assassination attempts against Trump and amid a broader rise in threats against public officials, scholars of political violence are debating whether incendiary rhetoric from political leaders makes real-world violence more likely.”

From me, two points:

First, I love words, so using divisive ones always strikes me as counterproductive.  It only results in what characterizes politics these days – contention, division, derision, and a win-at-all-costs mentality.

Second, divisive speech doesn’t contribute much, if anything, to what I long for in politics – the ability to see and land on the middle ground, which is where the best solutions to pressing public policy problems lie in the first place.

More from Wootson:

“Presidents and the White House have long been the focus of people driven by political grievances, personal instability or emotional volatility. But scholars who study political rhetoric and extremism say the country’s increasingly aggressive political language can make that more likely, even in cases where the perpetrator lacks an ideological motive.

“’The tone from the top models expected behavior,’ said Helio Fred Garcia, a professor of leadership at New York University and ‘Columbia University who has written a book on Trump’s political rhetoric.  ‘If you create conditions where hate and violence become more acceptable, people are going to act on that.  Sometimes it will be supporters.  Sometimes it will be opponents.”

Is Trump at fault for the descent into words abyss?

I say yes, though he is not alone.

Trump’s defenders say Democrats and the media unfairly pin the blame for political violence on the president and overlook the corrosive rhetoric of his political opponents.

Trump’s critics point to the president’s own record of harsh and aggressive speech.  His no-holds-barred approach has been central to his political identity since he first entered national politics, and it has intensified during his second term.  A Washington Post analysis found that Trump’s use of vulgar language, personal insults and self-aggrandizing rhetoric has increased markedly since his first term.  

Critics have pointed to the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol as the clearest example of incendiary political rhetoric with violent, real-world consequences.  Trump painted his Democrat opponents as illegitimate usurpers and urged supporters to come to Washington on January 6 for a gathering that ‘will be wild.’

Before the mob stormed the Capitol, Trump encouraged his supporters to ‘fight like hell’ to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.

My bottom lines:

• Listen more than you talk, including in politics, which, if it occurred, would stand normal politics today on its head.

• Strive to use words that don’t send antagonistic messages.

Too much?  Perhaps.  But worth a try.  Both in life and in politics.