President Trump and Visions for America: Final Report from the Moderator, Harold Heie
Moderator report on the completed Trump Conversation: Agreements and Disagreements, unanswered questions, advice for replicating this experiment
The complexities and nuances of our recently concluded conversation about “President Trump and Visions for America” are such that no two people will take-away the same set of conclusions. Therefore, what follows is my attempt to make coherent sense of it all. Although I draw deeply from the perspectives presented by all my conversation partners, I take full responsibility for the conclusions I present below.
I present my report in three sections: My perceptions of areas of agreement and disagreement that emerged from our series of conversations; my perception of questions that remain unanswered and beg for ongoing conversation; and my advice for those readers who wish to replicate this experiment in political discourse that draws heavily on what worked well and what did not work well (the beautiful and the ugly) in our conversation as well as my other past attempts to orchestrate respectful conversations among those Christians having strong disagreements. My ultimate hope is that the positive results that emerged from this conversation will inspire many readers to go out and do likewise in their respective spheres of influence.
President Trump and Visions for America: A Face-to-face Conversation
To adequately understand the source and sequence of what follows, it is important to first read the “Introduction” and “Methodology” pages that can be accessed directly above.
It is understatement to say that Christians, and others, in America have some strong disagreements about their visions for America and the extent to which President Trump is facilitating, or not, their respective visions.
The following sequence of transcribed face-to-face conversations among eight Christians living in Sioux County Iowa, selected because it was known that they had significant disagreements about Trump’s presidency, is intended to uncover the nature of their agreements and disagreements and to model respectful conversation about their disagreements.
As elaborated on the Introduction and Methodology pages, this conversation is taking place in three successive stages, as follows:
- Stage 1: Getting to Know One another and Agreeing to Engage Respectfully
- Stage 2: Individual responses to the question “What is your vision for America and how is President Trump facilitating, or not facilitating your vision for America?”
- Stage 3: Discussion of seven Leading Questions that emerged from Stage 2, with a focus on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement (For a listing of these seven Leading Questions, click here: Trump Leading Questions).
The results of these stages of conversation are now presented below.
SESSION 1 (April 23, 2019): Getting to know Each Other
Leading Questions: Respond, in 4-5 minutes, to the following questions:
- Who are you? (Briefly introduce yourself to us).
- Why have you joined this conversation? What do you hope to get out of this conversation? What is at stake? (Wherever possible, draw on aspects of your own “story” that inform your responses).
Given that the primary purpose of this first session is for the conversation partners to “get to know one another,” the responses given to these two questions will not be transcribed or recorded or otherwise preserved in any fashion.
SESSION 2 (May 7, 2019): Initial Reflections
Leading Questions: Respond, in 5-7 minutes, to the following questions:
- What is your vision for the future of America?
- To what extent do you believe President Trump is facilitating, or not, the accomplishment of your vision for the future of America?
Session 2 Transcriptions
Session 2 Audio Recording
SESSION 3 (September 4, 2019): Responses to the first Two Leading Questions (A&B) Raised by the Initial Reflections in Session 2.
- Leading Question A: What is your Christian understanding as to the meaning of “freedom” and to what extent is President Trump fostering, or not, your concept of freedom?
- Leading Question B: What is your Christian understanding as to the proper role of government in America, taking into account the “vison of the Founding Fathers,” and to what extent is President Trump facilitating, or not, your understanding?
SESSION 4 (September 18, 2019): Identifying agreements and disagreements for Questions A & B
CONTEXT: In session 3, all the conversation partners (CPs) had the opportunity respond, without interruption, to two Leading Questions (A & B below). This 4th Session was devoted to enabling all CPs to talk about some of their perceptions of agreements and disagreement based on their review of the transcripts from session 3.
Recall that the two questions addressed in session 3 were:
- A: What is your Christian understanding of the meaning of “freedom” and to what extent do you is President Trump facilitating, or not, your concept of freedom?
- B: What is your understanding as to the proper role of government in America, taking into account the “vision of the Founding Fathers,” and to what extent is President Trump facilitating, or not, your understanding?
Session 4 proceeded as follows: Each CP had the opportunity to address one other CP with whom he/she has a significant disagreement, presenting:
- An indication of an area of agreement (if that exists).
- A statement as to the substance of the disagreement.
The CP being addressed then had the opportunity to respond to the substance of the disagreement, after which all CPs were invited to join the conversation about that particular disagreement
Session 4 Transcripts:
SESSION 5 (October 8, 2019): Responses to the 3rd and fourth Leading Questions (C&D) Raised by the Initial Reflections in Session 2)
Leading Question C: What is your Christian understanding of the meaning of “prosperity” and to what extent is President Trump fostering, or not, such prosperity?
Leading Question D: What is your Christian understanding of the scope of the “gospel” and to what extent is President Trump fostering, or not, your understanding of that scope?
SESSION 6 (October 23, 2019): Identifying agreements and disagreements for Questions C & D
CONTEXT: In session 5, all the conversation partners (CPs) had the opportunity respond, without interruption, to two Leading Questions (C & D below). This 6th Session was devoted to enabling all CPs to talk about some of their perceptions of agreements and disagreement based on their review of the transcripts from session 5.
Recall that the two questions addressed in session 5 were:
- C. What is your Christian understanding of the meaning of “prosperity” and to what extent is President Trump fostering, or not, such prosperity?
- D. What is your Christian understanding of the scope of the “gospel” and to what extent is President Trump fostering, or not, your understanding of that scope?
Session 6 proceeded as follows: Each CP had the opportunity to address one other CP with whom he/she has a significant disagreement, presenting:
- An indication of an area of agreement (if that exists).
- A statement as to the substance of the disagreement.
The CP being addressed then had the opportunity to respond to the substance of the disagreement, after which all CPs were invited to join the conversation about that particular disagreement.
SESSION 7 (November 6, 2019): Responses to Leading Questions F&G Raised by the Initial Reflections in Session 2
Leading Question F:
FOR GENERAL NON-SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP: Identify one initiative President Trump has taken for which you disagree with his “goal” (“end”).’ clearly stating your reasons for your disagreement in terms of your Christian beliefs.
FOR GENERAL SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP: Identify one initiative President Trump has taken for which you agree with his “goal” (“end”), clearly stating your reasons for your agreement in terms of your Christian beliefs.
Leading Question G: How would you describe the way President Trump is “doing politics” (his “means” for seeking to accomplish his “political goals”)? Are his “means” consistent with your understanding of Christian values? If not, do you believe his “means” are justified because they lead to “ends” that you believe are consistent with Christian values?
Session 8 (November 20, 2019): Identifying Areas of Agreement and Disagreement for Questions F & G
CONTEXT: In session 7, all the conversation partners (CPs) had the opportunity respond, without interruption, to two questions (F & G below). This 8th Session will be devoted to enabling all CPs to talk about some of their perceptions of agreements and disagreement based on their review of the transcripts from session 7.
Recall that the two questions addressed in session 7 were:
- F. FOR GENERAL NON-SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP: Identify one initiative President Trump has taken for which you disagree with his “goal” (“end”).’ clearly stating your reasons for your disagreement in terms of your Christian beliefs.
FOR GENERAL SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP: Identify one initiative President Trump has taken for which you agree with his “goal” (“end”), clearly stating your reasons for your agreement in terms of your Christian beliefs. - G. How would you describe the way President Trump is “doing politics” (his “means” for seeking to accomplish his “political goals”)? Are his “means” consistent with your understanding of Christian values? If not, do you believe his “means” are justified because they lead to “ends” that you believe are consistent with Christian values?
HOMEWORK PRIOR TO SESSION 8: Keeping in mind our goal of evaluating President Trumps performance as president (in light of our visions for the future of America), and, as we do so, practicing how to engage one another respectfully, review all the transcripts from session 4 and do the following for each of the two questions F&G.
- From the transcript for each of the seven other CPs:
- Identify at least one area of agreement (if that exists).
- Identify all areas of disagreement that exist and, for each area of disagreement, formulate statements about the substance of your various disagreements that you would like to share with the relevant CP.
On the basis of that completed homework, session 8 will proceed as follows (with 7:00 to 7:45 devoted to the first question F and 7:45 to 8:30 devoted to the second question G).
- • Each CP will have the opportunity to address one other CP with whom he/she has a significant disagreement, presenting:
- An indication of an area of agreement (if that exists).
- A statement as to the substance of the disagreement.
- The CP being addressed will have the opportunity to respond to the substance of the disagreement, after which all CPs will be invited to join the conversation about that particular disagreement
Session 9 (December 18, 2019): Improvised Ongoing Conversation About the “Means” and “Ends” Distinction Discussed In Question F & G
CONTEXT: Questions F & G focused on the distinction between political goals (“ends”) and the “means” used to work toward accomplishment of those goals. It became apparent at the end of session 8 that more conversation was needed relative to this distinction. Therefore, a special extra session was called for December 18 to continue this conversation, for which the following two new Leading Questions were posed:
- G2: Given the position taken by one of the conversation partners that Donald Trump does use some “unchristian means” (e.g., “vulgar language, rude behavior, belittling opponents”), to work toward the accomplishment of his desired “ends” and the position of this same conversation partner that “”there is no justification for anyone to utilize un-Christian means to accomplish an end [presumably even an end that fits well with Christian values], is it fair to surmise that this conversation partner voted for Donald Trump because if he had voted for Hillary Clinton, he would have been voting for someone who would act even more un-Christianly than Trump has acted (by, for example, pushing for a strong pro-choice agenda relative to abortion)?
[After this conversation partner responded to this question, all of his other conversation partners were given the opportunity to do likewise]. - G3: If there are “un-Christian” elements in both the “means” used by Donald Trump and the “ends” that Hilary Clinton would have pursued if she had been elected, how do you choose who to vote for? Do you choose to vote for the candidate whose “un-Christian” behavior you judge to be “worse” (and how do you decide what is “worse”?); or do you argue for a very radical proposal that the USA needs to adopt a multi-party system that allows for Christians to form a third party that seeks to avoid both types of “un-Christian” behavior? Are there any other options?
SESSION 10 (JANUARY 8, 2020): Responses to Leading Questions H & I
LEADING QUESTION H (ADDRESSED TO NON-TRUMP SUPPORTERS): What is your assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the policies that President Trump has facilitated (e.g., on taxes, trade, etc; ending with immigration – the subject of the next question)?
LEADING QUESTION I: What is your assessment of Harold’s attempt (in chapter 7 of his book Reforming American Politics to uncover a “both/and” approach to comprehensive immigration reform as an example of a “conversational model” for doing politics (in contrast to either the “domination” or “withdrawal” options); as well as the similar “five principles” (not specific policy proposals) enumerated in the previously distributed “Evangelical Call for Restitution-Based Immigration Reform?”
After each conversation partner was be given the opportunity to respond to these two questions, the discussion centered on seeking to identify areas of agreement and disagreement.
SESSION 11 (JANUARY 22, 2020): Responses to End-Game Questions
In preparation for this last session for this Trump conversation, all conversation partners were asked to submit written responses to the following end-game questions:
- What areas of agreement, if any, emerged from our conversations?
- What major areas of disagreement still remain?
- What changes, if any, emerged in your beliefs about “President Trump and Visions for America” as a result of our conversations?
- What changes, if any, emerged in your perceptions, of those conversation partners who generally disagreed with you about how well President Trump is facilitating, or not, your vision for America?
- What, if anything, did you find to be profitable, from your participation in our conversations?
- What, if anything, did you find to be unprofitable, from your participation in our conversations?
- If you decided to facilitate a similar conversation among a new set of conversation partners, how would you structure such a conversation (drawing on your responses to the above questions)?
Session 11 was devoted to seeking to identify areas of agreement and disagreement in the responses given to these questions.
Recent Comments