To say that there was a lot of big political news this week would be a huge understatement. Both John Kasich and Ted Cruz suspended their presidential campaigns, effectively leaving Donald Trump as the GOP nominee for president. On the democratic side, Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton in the great state of Indiana by about 5.5 points, partially revitalizing a campaign that had been losing mainstream credibility since their loss in New York. However, two other stories that went viral this week highlight how even six months before the general election, extreme political rhetoric is affecting the everyday lives of Americans.

In the first story, which you can read more about here, a woman in line at a Walmart yelled at the man ahead of her in front of his child for using food stamps to pay for his groceries, complaining that she is the one actually providing for his family. Though the man tried to explain that he works 50-60 hours a week and that she should contact her local congressman if she wants to see change, the woman declared that the man must be a Bernie Sanders supporter because "they give it to you so you vote that way."

In the second story, which you can read more about here, a tow truck driver who was called to help a woman stranded on the side of the highway in South Carolina subsequently abandoned the woman he was supposed to help after seeing her Bernie Sanders bumper sticker. Moreover, though the woman was disabled and had a prominently displayed disability placard, the man advised the woman to "call the government" for a tow.

In both of these instances, nothing illegal occurred. Getting into a heated argument in line at a Walmart is not an illicit act, and political affiliation is not protected class under the law. While many would argue that the woman could have called another tow company and that the market will naturally negatively affect a business that refuses business to a paying customer, imagine the precedent this sets: If businesses refused to provide goods and services to those of certain political affiliations and you got stranded on the highway where everyone around you is on the opposite side of the political spectrum, you'd be out of luck.

And as we've seen, coming out in favor against a certain group of people can sometimes help a business. In 2015, the owners of Memories Pizza in Walkerton, Indiana, raised over $840,000 from supporters after claiming that they would refuse to cater same-sex weddings. Though the store closed due to the controversy, something tells me the owners weren't too upset with the outcome. If a business's discriminatory practices fall in line with the viewpoints of those around them, who's to stop them? Is this not the 1950s all over again?

There's no question that our country is extremely divided politically; it seems like every day we hear of some new, terrible thing that happened to protesters at a Donald Trump rally. But around election time, these divisions are more likely to spill into our everyday lives. People feel that the unchecked, extreme rhetoric of the election season gives them tacit approval to lash out against others even outside of a political context. But the problem with this is that it creates a never-ending cycle of hatred. Candidates must espouse increasingly radical viewpoints to gain popularity, ultimately validating and growing said radical viewpoints. And while this tactic might be effective at garnering votes, it means that we're all going to have to get a little more comfortable with confrontation.