Just because you can, doesn't mean you should

It seems like deja vu. Four years ago on Veterans Day, on the heels of a close election outcome, I wrote about the importance of veterans serving as unifying change agents in a divided society.

This year I’m reflecting on something I am trying to teach my son, Sam: Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. It’s rooted in the idea of forbearance. Just because you hold power in a situation doesn’t mean you should use it to the hilt. Just because you feel wronged doesn't mean you should always exact retribution. Living with restraint isn’t just a pragmatic idea, it also flows from Biblical beliefs on the fruits of the Spirit. Patience. Self-control. Kindness.

I’ve spent a couple deployments fighting the declared enemies of the United States. In a war, there are many settings where it is easy to ignore forbearance. You are rougher than you should be in handling a detainee. After all, he might have tried to blow you up a few days earlier. You ram down the gate instead of knocking on the door. After all, you need to show force. You run a speeding car off the road. After all, it looked like it might be approaching your convoy. Admittedly, many of these decisions can be unclear and have different contexts. It can be difficult to think through whether an action that makes you feel safer in the moment might also make you less safe in the future. It’s easy to jettison forbearance because restraint seems antithetical to survival. I know because I didn’t get every decision right as a young officer, whether it came to my own actions or the actions I allowed from my men.

And yet in America today, the lack of forbearance makes it feel like we are living in a war zone. Fellow citizens, taking cues from political leadership who exercise their power to the fullest, treat each other as enemies, rather than well-meaning opponents. It ignores the more likely reality that exists: we share many overlapping values, with some diverging values, and have different approaches to achieve those values.

One of the historical acts of forbearance in the United States, even during more divided times, is election concession. Concession is not a requirement in the Constitution, but it is a celebrated tradition. In 1896, William Jennings Bryan sent a two sentence telegram to William McKinley. “Senator Jones has just informed me that the returns indicate your election, and I hasten to extend my congratulations,” he wrote. “We have submitted the issue to the American people and their will is law.” I encourage you to watch historical presidential concessions. Some of the candidates delivering these speeches heaped praise on their opponents and expressed their commitment to the peaceful transfer of power, even as crowds from their own party interrupted them with booing and yelling. They were not obligated to suffer the humiliation of such a speech. Yet their forbearance strengthened and built trust in the American democratic system of election.

There was foreshadowing this year would be different. Well before the election, President Trump made it clear the only way he would “lose this election is if it is rigged.” Secretary Clinton said that Vice President Biden shouldn’t concede to President Trump “under any circumstances.” She said this even after delivering a gracious presidential concession speech after an election loss in 2016 that was decided by 77,000 votes across three states.

Yet even more unnerving is the speed at which politicians, and many people on social media, called into question the election’s legitimacy while the results were unfolding, particularly that it was fraudulent or stolen. I say this is unnerving for a couple reasons. First, as a veteran it is difficult to consider that I was deployed to fight against supposed threats to our democracy, and yet the democratic election system I defended is suddenly fraudulent. Second, I’m fortunate to have been educated about election procedures by my wife Rachel who, alongside other selfless Americans of different political stripes, worked as both a partisan poll watcher and a non-partisan poll worker at multiple polling sites during this last election.

Even though you can (mostly) say whatever you want on social media about the election results, in the spirit of forbearance, I ask that you consider the following questions before you post your opinion:

-Do I know the role that poll watchers play in ensuring transparent elections?

-Do I know what a provisional ballot is? Do I understand the circumstances under which absentee ballots are counted? Do I know what balloting curing is?

-Do I know that many states (like Florida) have been using mail-in ballots for decades? Do I understand that state elections laws determine how many days election officials are allowed to count mail-in ballots?

-Did I read any of the lawsuits made against the election results and court responses to them before citing the lawsuits themselves as proof of fraud?

-Do I understand the role the media plays in calling elections? Do I understand the process the media (specifically the Associated Press) uses to call the election? Do I understand why the 2000 presidential election has caused additional caution in calling the election?

-Do I understand the milestones associated with the Electoral College? Do I know when all state recounts and court cases must be complete? Do I know how electoral ballots are cast and counted?

-Do I know what the margin is for requesting a recount and historical amounts that recounts have shifted votes?

-Do I know what the current likelihood of voter fraud is? Am I aware of existing measures that prevent voter fraud?

-Am I advocating to continue counting ballots in one state while advocating to stop counting ballots in another state? Am I accepting the results of a portion of the election (e.g. the Senator I voted for won) but contesting the results of a different portion of the election (e.g. the presidential candidate I voted for lost)?

-Do I believe that spreading conspiracy theories, even if later proven to be false, can still erode trust in American elections?

I write this because while many agree about the division in our country, few have articulated pathways out of it. Forbearance is one of those paths. In the absence of forbearance, it is easy to say things about the election results that, even if later disproven, erode away at trust and the peaceful transfer of power. It is also effortless to share something that lays out an opponent as a racist or a socialist. For a moment, it’s gratifying. Especially if you feel your political “team” has lost, it feels good to claw back some of your opponent’s victory. You have the freedom to do so.

But just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.