5 days Ago By Chicago Tribune
Regarding the op-ed “I am a Mexican American who voted for Trump. No, I don’t hate myself.,” Nov.
13: I do concur with J. Marcos Peterson’s opinion that the Democratic Party has much to do to right its ship. But while Peterson’s vote does not make him any “ist” or “ic,” he did place his vote for a candidate who portrays all the qualities of the things he claims to have been called.
Bottom line — Peterson voted for an individual who has vowed to deport his undocumented family members. While he identifies as a college-educated, gay Latino, I feel that his vote removes the “proud” adjective from his self-description, for throwing his family members under the bus is surely nothing to be proud of. Obviously, he has benefited from citizen status as he was born here.
Their struggle is not his. Past administrations, including Donald Trump’s earlier stint in the White House, have had the opportunity to address our broken immigration system and have not. And many undocumented citizens have lived, worked and raised families in this country without a clear path forward to citizenship.
Our broken system is a poor reason to exile them back to homelands they no longer identify with. I’ve always perceived “woke” as an awareness that the playing field is not level and we should all make that attempt to at least not make life more difficult for those who were not born with our advantages. The incoming administration promises to do the opposite to not only immigrants who are undocumented but the LGBTQ+ community and women as well.
— Teresa Groat, Chicago J. Marcos Peterson’s opinion piece describes why voting for Donald Trump makes him none of the “ist” and “ic” labels he has been called. His comments about his family’s realities, everyday people, wealth and crime support his position.
Yet his language in describing people who voted for Kamala Harris — “self-righteous,” “label-obsessed left” and “the wokeism of the extreme left” — puts each of us who voted for Harris into the same kind of box in which he does not wish to be put: a stereotype described by jargon, used by folks who do not like our point of view. If we are to talk with each other, exchange ideas about our different opinions across the continuum of the political spectrum and reach compromises, as he suggests, then we all need to take care with our language to avoid alienating one another. — Marge Shenk, Evanston In response to J.
Marcos Peterson’s op-ed criticizing Democrats for being out of touch with “regular folks” like him, I’d like to raise a few pertinent points about Peterson based on his public LinkedIn profile. One: Peterson is a lifelong Republican activist. The first experience he lists is working in the George W.
Bush White House and the second is working on the Mitt Romney presidential campaign in 2012. Two: Despite Peterson’s criticism of Democrats for the word “Latinx” (he gives no evidence that any Democrat used that word in the 2024 campaign), he himself appears to perfectly be comfortable with using the word in his LinkedIn profile. I would encourage the Tribune opinion team to disclose these facts so that readers can decide for themselves whether Peterson is indeed one of the “regular folk” or a Republican mercenary using the Tribune to audition for a job in the Donald Trump administration.
— Nick Wallace, Chicago The Nov. 13 opinion pieces by J. Marcos Peterson and Christine Ledbetter ( “Harris lost because our country fosters institutional misogyny” ) are truly revealing and remarkably profound.
Taken together, they describe and explain almost everything a future political scientist would need to research in order to understand the 2024 election. In an effort to bridge the vast chasm that is now politically dividing our country, I’d suggest that reading both of these heartfelt, well-written essays with an open mind might be an excellent place to start. — Warren Seigel, Northbrook The op-ed by J.
Marcos Peterson is a stunner. Peterson makes his case for why he voted for Donald Trump and not Kamala Harris for president. His basic premise is that the Democratic Party has let down almost every group it claims to support.
I am shocked at how bitter he is and how this bitterness drove him to vote for Trump. Clearly, many voters feel that the Democrats have not met their needs or wants. But to pivot to a convicted felon and man found liable for sexual assault who has demeaned just about everyone and every group feels like a cruel joke.
I’m stunned that voters like Peterson who felt that Democrats had abandoned them flocked to Trump — a person who demands loyalty from those around him but has never been loyal to anyone in return. Don’t count on Trump to advocate for any kind of inclusion for all those who voted for him. We can already see that in his picks for Cabinet positions.
At least with Democrats, there is always the possibility of negotiation and compromise, but there will be none of that with this administration. I fear that our country will have to go down a deep dark hole before we see the light again. — Judy Weik, Oak Park When I first read J.
Marcos Peterson’s recent essay, I thought it brilliant satire. But then I realized he wasn’t putting us on. He’s as innocent as a babe in the woods.
For example, he appears not to know that our recent inflationary economy was caused largely by supply chain issues, not any presidential policy. He also seems unaware that Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs and tax cuts for the wealthy will make things worse, not better, for the working classes. Most surprisingly, Peterson still believes that Trump cares about regular people and the issues that affect them.
How has he missed the obvious? Trump’s words and actions over the last eight years prove again and again that he cares about only one thing: Donald Trump. But then, such macroeconomic and political facts can be complicated and boring and get in the way of how Trump voters like to “feel” about things such as immigration and “wokeism.” Apparently, Peterson’s ignorance is his bliss.
In his op-ed, Peterson assures us that his vote for Trump does not make him racist, sexist, misogynistic or homophobic. Since I don’t know him, I’ll have to take his word for it. But he certainly had no problem voting for an openly racist, sexist, misogynistic and homophobic presidential candidate.
Whatever is one to make of that? — Matt Carey, Chicago J. Marcos Peterson does not hate himself because Republicans don’t hate themselves. The vote for Donald Trump was mostly a protest vote (and clearly misogynistic) that will haunt us for decades to come.
Peterson voted for a tyrant and a criminal who will support book burning, force trans people into a dark closet and deport his family. Immigrants not supporting other immigrants because it appears they have it easier looks a little like self-hate. The gay community is not on Peterson’s side.
— Daniel Slocum, Chicago Regarding J. Marcos Peterson’s op-ed, will Peterson be upset when much of his family is rounded up, placed in a detention camp and deported? Will he be upset when President Donald Trump, the Republican-dominated Congress, state legislatures dominated by the Republican Party and/or the U.S.
Supreme Court take away a few gay rights? — David Kempner, Vernon Hills Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected] ..
