I must take issue with Clarence Page’s analysis of the results of Tuesday’s elections and why the Democrats experienced such sweeping defeat (“Will Dems learn from a humiliating loss?” Nov. 10). I do not believe that the results were because Democrats misunderstood some voting groups or failed to capitalize on some opportunities or anything else that has to do with the “business” of elections. I think the Democrats lost because their ideas and direction are being repudiated as more and more people in the U.S. become directly affected by these out-of-touch and divisive proposals and the bombastic arguments used to support them. I can only refer to my own thinking when I voted, but I believe it applies broadly to many others. I voted for Donald Trump not because I like him or think he’s got answers that no one else has. And I think most people in this race really voted “against“ someone or something and not “for” someone or something. I voted especially to check the momentum of the (largely) Democratic ideas and movements that I find destructive, divisive and unfair to the great majority of this nation’s voters. I voted to halt a progressive disease. I voted against the idea that going further is always better. In my heart, I was striking back against the hectoring superiority, the people who told me I was too stupid to understand or too racist, too sexist, too self-hating, too similar to Nazis. I voted to make those fiercely divisive and destructive arguments, and the ideas they support, stop. Democrats need to better understand why these ideas, these programs and the brow-beating arguments used to support them are so repugnant to the majority of people. Until they do, they will continue to be surprised by the thinking of the “great middle” — the people of this country who go to work, pay their bills and taxes, and support their local communities. We have had enough of these radical ideas and the arguments that we are somehow “bad” if we don’t agree. We are not bad people. We simply disagree on the merits, and when we are not heard in our legislatures, when we are mocked and ridiculed for our thinking and have our ideals trampled by elite groups, we will continue to vote for those who understand that, in a democracy, the majority rules. — John Power, Schererville, Indiana What liberals achieved In the wake of Donald Trump’s election victory, there a has been a lot of blaming and bashing of “liberal elites.” Please remember that it was liberals who brought the nation the civil rights movement, women’s liberation, gay liberation, cleaner air and water, universally available medical insurance, an increased minimum wage, and safer cars and workplaces. Research at the much-maligned elite universities gave us smartphones, the internet and streaming TV — benefits enjoyed by all rungs of society. Liberals may have overreached a couple of times in the past few years, but overall, it’s been quite an impressive 60-year run. I guess the liberal era is now over. Let’s see if the MAGA philosophy can accomplish anything comparable to help our citizens. — Sanford Stein, Evanston President-elect Donald Trump, right, escorted by House Speaker Mike Johnson, arrives for a meeting with the House GOP conference Nov. 13, 2024, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/AP) Dreading next 4 years When I was a child, the legend of a young George Washington cutting down a cherry tree captured my thoughts. According to the legend, when questioned by his father, George said, “I cannot tell a lie.” By means of that story, I was taught that American presidents do not lie. Fast-forwarding to Nov. 5, I voted for Kamala Harris. Journalists and pundits would have me believe I voted for her because I am college-educated. I beg to differ. My college education did not teach me the difference between right and wrong. My parents and mentors did. I voted for Harris because I believed it was the right decision not just for me, but also for our country. Conversely, many “educated” individuals cast their vote for the ex-president. What is the pundit response to that phenomenon? I say fear and greed reared their ugly heads. Back to the Washington story, how many lies has the ex-president told? How many instances of grift and unspeakable acts is he responsible for? How can anyone, particularly evangelicals, consider voting for someone who performed a mock sex act on a microphone before a crowd and in front of cameras? What do we tell our children if the Ten Commandments begin getting posted in classrooms? Is the golden rule now orange? Are Americans so blinded by the hypocrisy of the ex-president’s crowdsourcing game that they cannot see the truth? More importantly, do they even want to see the truth? Sadly, I know the answer to those questions. I am among many who are dreading how the next four years will play out. — Moisette Sintov McNerney, Arlington Heights Calm down, Americans There’s a great deal of hand-wringing among Kamala Harris voters that the election of Donald Trump signals the doom of American democracy. That’s counterbalanced by Trump voters gleeful at the prospect of putting an end to creeping socialism, the power of the “deep state” and woke culture, among other things. The two-party system has largely restrained the excesses of both sides. Each party has gained executive power only to see the electorate flip to the other side. Consider the past 100 years. Since 1924, nine Republicans have held the office, serving a combined total of 50 years. This includes Gerald Ford who only completed Nixon’s second term and was never elected on his own. Over the same period, eight Democrats have been elected the office for a total of 52 years. Only twice in all that time has the same political party held office for more than eight years — Democrats Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman combined for 20 years and Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for 12 years. A greater limitation, furthermore, is placed on incoming presidencies by the election of the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate two years into the initial four-year term. Generally,  a newly elected president’s first term sees one-party control of both houses of Congress for the first two years. So, please my fellow citizens, calm down. Contrary to what only the zaniest of us think, there will be another election in two years. The electorate will either approve of the events of the first two years or, more probably, check, modify or perhaps even reverse them. Either way, the people will have spoken. — Bob Foys, Chicago What about this election? I have a question for those who believe that the Democrats stole the 2020 election. Why didn’t they steal this one? — David Passman, Skokie Comparing presidents’ kids In response to Myrna Silver’s letter (“Delay judgment of Trump,” Nov. 9) on how Donald Trump’s kids turned out versus Joe Biden’s son Hunter, I have two comments: What about Beau Biden, who had an exemplary career in the military and government service before dying too young? And I sincerely doubt Trump had a hand in raising his children with any of his three wives. Changing diapers, rocking sick babies and even reading bedtime stories do not seem like things Trump would consider his responsibility. — J. Edmunds, Chicago Done with Catholic Church Fifty-six percent of U.S. Catholics voted for Donald Trump. Pope Francis said both candidates were evil but that Americans should vote for the lesser evil. I assume he meant Kamala Harris, but who knows. New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan sat alongside Donald Trump at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner and laughed and smiled while Trump stood at the lectern and said demeaning and disrespectful things. This is the Catholic Church? I kept asking myself: “What would Jesus do?” How naive I was. Raised Catholic on the West Side of Chicago, I dutifully went to Mass, prayed and really believed that good would win out. But through the years, learning about child abuse scandals, the misogyny and outright dismissal of women, Vatican banking scandals and now this, I realize I can no longer support this institution. I will continue to follow Jesus’ teachings and hopefully live my life in a good and kind way, but I can no longer support this church. I’m done. — Susan Dwyer-Marshall, Chicago Reason is pretty obvious Did Donald Trump win the presidential election for the same simple reason that Bill Clinton won the election in 1992? It’s the economy, stupid. — William Boodro, Arlington Heights A list to make for 2028 Whether the results of the presidential election are a cause for celebration, disappointment or finger-pointing, people may want to write down a few things while it’s fresh in their minds. What you hope will happen. What you’re afraid might happen. That may be useful when it’s time to vote again in 2028. — Jerry Levy, Deerfield What about Illinoisans? Editorial cartoonist Mike Luckovich’s political spin on the “Peanuts” cartoon (in print Nov. 9) shows Lucy with a Donald Trump face as she holds the ball for the kick from Charlie Brown, who is wearing an Uncle Sam hat, as he thinks to himself, “It will be different this time.” Luckovich could make a better analogy if Lucy were covered with an Illinois Democrats symbol, as once again, we Illinois voters have sent the same people back into office, hoping this time it will be different. We will never learn, will we? — Jane Thomas, Arlington Heights Pritzker should back off First, I voted the Democratic ticket, lest readers think I am a MAGA supporter. Second, I would urge Gov. JB Pritzker to continue to be a happy warrior but to be more restrained in his approach. There is no reason to poke a bear, particularly one that is no longer slumbering but rather bolstered by winning not only a substantial number of the electoral votes but also the popular vote this time around. Also, Pritzker represents the entire state of Illinois, not just Chicago. Central and southern Illinoisans overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump, and Pritzker should not disrespect these residents with his words and/or deeds. If Pritzker truly has presidential aspirations, he should consider what Trump’s win tells us in Illinois. Thus, his priorities should be protecting and enhancing Illinois’ economy and infrastructure; assuring safety through supporting all first responders; making sure the SAFE-T Act does not allow repeat felony gun offenders to be on the streets; reducing home costs (particularly for young homebuyers and renters); and reducing the impact of illegal immigration on Illinois residents pocketbooks. That said, he should continue to make Illinois a welcoming state for those pursuing legal immigration as it will bolster our economy, and he should continue to protect reproductive rights for women and families in Illinois. If I were him, I would not focus Illinois resources on battling for an assault weapons ban, particularly given the current makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court, or trying to force LGBTQ education in public schools. In the long term, these goals may be worth pursuing, but you have to play the hand your dealt. Pritzker should only battle when he absolutely must and avoid starting fights on taxpayer dollars, which he would likely lose in the short term. So far, Pritzker has been a measured and wise leader for Illinois. We need him to carry on in kind now more then ever. — Clare Connor, Chicago Wrong fight to wage As evidenced recently, Gov. JB Pritzker will be fighting the federal government on all sorts of issues. It is obvious the governor is oblivious to the problems he is confronted with, least of all the federal government. Democrat Kamala Harris won the state of Illinois in the Nov. 5 election with 3 million votes to Trump’s 2.4 million. Overlooked are Illinois’ 102 counties — Harris won just 12, and Trump won 90. Pritzker’s’ problems go further. Illinois faces a $3 billion deficit, and population declines continue. Illinois had 27 electoral votes in 1952; today, we have 19. In 1950, Illinois had 26 US House representatives; today, it’s 17. Public pensions continue to be underfunded. Our units of government still number more than 8,000. Illinois is in the top 10 of states with the highest tax burden. The SAFE-T Act is failing as defendants fail to arrive for their court dates. Instead of focusing on national issues, he should try properly governing Illinois. Pritzker should accept the transition in our federal government. Perhaps he should try for some unity rather than perpetuating his divisive attitude. — Joseph A. Murzanski, Orland Park Trump’s biggest con I almost fell out of my chair after reading the latest and greatest from regular letter writer Bruce R. Hovanec (“Governor should turn page,” Nov. 12). So Gov. JB Pritzker should “turn the page, put the last four years of negativity behind us”? The negativity, attacks and lies began in June 2015 when Donald Trump announced he was running for president and slowly rode down that escalator. Trump, not Pritzker, is the reason for the gross division in this country. The idea that Trump “tells it like it is” is his biggest con of all. He tells his followers not how it is, but what they want to hear, appealing to their worst primal instincts. A Chicago police detective once noted that robbers force you to give it up, burglars and thieves take it without your knowledge, but the con artist gets the victim to conspire in their own victimization. In this election, it would appear that we have just north of 75 million victims who conspired in a political Ponzi scheme. The problem is that the rest of us have been taken down with them. — Richard Williams, Highland Park Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].