I’m thinking about starting a new political movement–one with the goal of starting to bridge the political gap that often appears to be the forerunner of the next civil war. I call the movement “Stop Calling America Stupid” or SCAS. I am putting SCAS on grey baseball hats that I will sell online and hand out at SCAS rallies. SCAS is not a new political party or an effort to take over an existing one. It is a movement to encourage people to stop calling each other names. Nothing more.

In my opinion, America made a mistake on November 5. I worry about America’s future. For the next hundred years, historians will write about what led to Trump winning the election. Depending on what the next four years brings, MAGA voters will be credited with being prescient in bringing about much-needed change in American government or dismissed as voters who brought the wrong candidate to power. Some historians will make the same mistake many opinion leaders are making today—they will call MAGA voters stupid. The more charitable anti-Trump writers will call them “mistaken” or “misled.”

I like the later analysis because many Trump supporters, including a few who stoop to calling me a lunatic or “deranged,” are not stupid people. Some went to good colleges, have important jobs, and are solid family members. They look nothing like the beer-swigging, gun-toting militia members who are sometimes credited as being “Trump’s base.”

So, let’s acknowledge that you don’t have to be stupid to be glad Trump won the election. That means that there is hope. There is hope because it may be impossible to change the mind of a stupid person, but you can reason with an intelligent one. The problem is not the intelligent MAGA supporting understanding you but getting them to engage in discussions with you. And they will never engage in discussions with you if you are calling them stupid or if they are calling you deranged or suggesting that you be deported along with “migrant criminals.”

That is why America needs a cease-fire on the supercharged political rhetoric that has Made America Ugly Again. A case in point, we must stop calling the President-Elect a “NAZI.”

Like every ceasefire in history, this cannot happen unless one side takes the first step by stowing away its anger and hate. It needs to turn the other cheek when Donald Trump calls progressives communists, utters what they consider to be racial slurs, and makes proposals best described as acts of war—things like sending the army to Greenland to “take” it.

The Trump transition has made it difficult for those of us who might join my SCAS movement with his questionable presidential appointments, plans to pardon offensively named “January 6 patriots,” and his continued threats of retribution against his perceived enemies. Trump and MAGA are in the middle of a Dionysian dance of celebration that will not end for at least a few months. During this time, it will be unlikely for SCAS to make much progress, which is not to say that the effort to launch a civil dialogue should not begin now. Rather, it is urgent that it begins right now. Remember that a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.

I will not wish Donald Trump “God Speed,” like Judge Merchan did as he handed Donald Trump his sentence in the “hush money” case. I don’t want to see his policies become the law of the land. Joining SCAS doesn’t mean abandoning principles or empathy for people whom you believe will be harmed by Trump’s policies. Instead, good SCAS members believe that Trump’s agenda will eventually fail, or will fail to be enacted and implemented and that America will be left with the need to Return America to What it Was Before Trump or Make America Something Different from What Trump Wants to Make It.

America is not lost. America is not in decline. And America has not repudiated democracy by electing Trump. We are on a detour, not an elevator descending to hell. There is hope. And the way to turn that hope into a change in policy is to stop calling America stupid and begin setting the stage to work with others on a new and improved path.

J.E. Dean writes on politics, government, and, too infrequently, other subjects. A former counsel on Capitol Hill and public affairs consultant, Dean also writes for Dean’s List on Medium and Dean’s Issues & Insights on Substack.

On the campaign trail for Trump, Elon Musk waxed eloquently about the need to cut government spending and regulations. To do so, Trump announced that he planned to appoint Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead an outside task force called the Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. 

Before the election, Musk claimed he planned to cut $2 trillion from federal government spending. Last week Musk changed his tune and said he probably would be able to cut less than $1 trillion. Why? Because it’s much more difficult to cut government spending than you might imagine. More than two-thirds of the federal budget goes to defense, Social Security, Medicare, veterans benefits and interest payments on the nation’s $36 trillion debt—all areas which Trump has promised not to cut.

So where does the irony come in with Musk and cost-cutting? Let’s take a brief look at how much money Musk has received from government contracts and subsidies over the last 14 years. 

Space X has secured contracts for approximately $20 billion for crew and cargo resupply missions to the International Space Station and Starship development for lunar missions.

Tesla has received several types of government support, including a $465 million low-interest loan from the Department of Energy. He also has received significant income from environmental regulatory credits. These credits resulted in a substantial part of Tesla’s revenue, contributing more than $517 million by 2015, and an additional $10 billion since 2015. And don’t forget the Federal $7,000 tax credit that each Tesla owner received simply for buying an electric vehicle at a time when Tesla had a near monopoly on the electric vehicle market.

Solar City, which Tesla acquired, has received direct grants, tax credits and other subsidies including a $497 million direct grant from the U.S. Treasury Department. 

In short, a prime reason that Musk is the richest man in the world is because of the money he has received from the federal government. 

In the past, Musk has also had several adversarial knock-down drag outs with government regulators over the safety of his Teslas and environmental issues over his rockets. In his new role, Musk will potentially have control over government regulators who are regulating his companies. 

There is no question that Elon Musk is a brilliant entrepreneur. He has been declared an engineering and managerial genius. His IQ is estimated to be around 155, right up there with Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking. His accomplishments to date are beyond impressive. But he also is driven to get to Mars as soon as possible and wants nothing to stand in his way—including regulators who care about safety and the environment—and competitors, such as Boeing and Jeff Bezos—his biggest competitors in the Space race. (Bezos and Musk both have rockets scheduled to launch this week.) 

In his new position, Musk potentially will have the ability to get rid of some regulations and put the kibosh on some of his competition in the space race. Such conflicts used to be stifled at the outset. But in this brave new world, they seem to be alive and well and living in the USA. (In addition to exerting major influence on the U.S. and outer space, Musk is now endorsing the far-right candidate for Germany, has inserted himself into British politics encouraging the most conservative option, and has cozied up to Italy’s conservative prime minister Giorgia Meloni whom he has bonded with over their mutual affection for the Lord of the Rings trilogy.)

Jeff Bezos just announced a $40 million Amazon deal for a Melania Trump documentary. James Carville, who is well versed in the documentary market, claims that you can make an A-plus documentary for $2 million. 

The concept of buying favor for personal gain, now front and center, is a distressing turn of events.

There is no question that there is government waste that can be pared down. But there’s also no question that regulations are needed to protect our environment and the safety of our citizens. There’s also no question that it is wrong to award government contracts to the entrepreneur with the deepest pockets—especially when the ultimate grifter, Donald Trump, is leading the charge. 

It’s time for government watchdogs to do their jobs. It’s also time that we put limits on the amount of money these entrepreneurs can put forth to get the go-ahead on their pet projects and line the pockets of the Commander-in-Chief. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.