The divide between political parties has become wider than ever. There is a larger polarization of views on issues related to regulation, gender, race, and immigration etc. According to Pew Research, the average gap between self-identified Democrats and Republicans has more than doubled since 1994 from 15 points to 36 points. Even compared to 2004, today, there is a much larger percentage of Democrats that have become consistently more liberal than the median Republican and vice versa, which means that they are less likely to adopt any of the ideas of the other party. This widening partisan divide is making people less likely engage in positive and thoughtful conversations with each other, less likely form healthy relationships with those of differing views, and less likely to collaborate to make informed decisions.

In the 2016 presidential race, a large portion of Americans had the assumption the that what candidate chose of words during a campaign has little to do with what he or she will say or do while in office. There was a popular excuse that candidates in the 1960s said way worse things. Doesn't that technically mean that we as a society haven't improved since the 1960s?

When Mrs. Clinton spoke at Rutgers back in March 29th, she mentioned how years ago Democrats and Republicans in the US Senate used to gather together for dinner to converse, find common ground, and then debate about where they disagree when creating solutions. Now they hardly ever talk to each other or socialize anymore.

From the conservative end, when Ben Shapiro visited UC Berkely, protestors attempted to keep him from giving a speech. When asked by a reporter about the First Amendment, the organizer of that protest stated the "Constitution is irrelevant right now." There were also reports of protesters threatening violence on those who attended the event and the carrying of banned weapons at the protest. First of all, the use of threats and temptation does not make the protest peaceful or acceptable by any moral means. Second, there's a very big difference between saying that there are certain limits to the First Amendment and saying that it is irrelevant because, without the First Amendment, the students would not have been allowed to protest anyways. Finally, giving a speech in a civil manner should not be prohibited just because most people in an area don't share the same views as the speaker. People should at least be given the opportunity to listen to someone they may or may not agree with.

No matter what your political ideology is, we should all have a common goal of creating a safer, healthier and better country. We can't make that happen without the collaboration of people across opposite ends of the political spectrum. Solving any local, national or international issue requires open-minded dialogue that considers the opinions and concerns of all parties that will be affected by the issue, not just one. Sometimes achieving common goals will mean breaking the "rules" of the party that you are committed to and choosing to side with the opposite political party.