{"id":1028,"date":"2018-05-28T14:25:29","date_gmt":"2018-05-28T18:25:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=1028"},"modified":"2018-05-28T14:25:29","modified_gmt":"2018-05-28T18:25:29","slug":"post-partisan-opinion-dont-burn-the-flag-and-11-more-rules-for-free-speech","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=1028","title":{"rendered":"Post Partisan\u00a0Opinion – \u2018Don\u2019t burn the flag\u2019 and 11 more rules for free speech"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n
\n
By\u00a0<\/span>Megan McArdle<\/a><\/span>May 28 at 11:49 AM<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
<\/a>
\nAnti- and pro-Trump protesters clash during competing demonstrations at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in Berkeley, Calif., on April 15, 2017. (Anda Chu\/San Jose Mercury News via AP)<\/span><\/div>\n

If you write a\u00a0column<\/a>\u00a0about athletes kneeling during the national anthem, you can expect to find yourself rapidly mired in debates about free speech. Because speech is (we lightheartedly hope) nuanced and complex, there will always be an element of \u201cI know it when I see it\u201d in placing cases into \u201cprotected\u201d or \u201cunprotected\u201d categories. Which means we could spend the rest of our lives arguing about just what free speech means \u2014 and, frankly, we probably will.<\/p>\n

What we ought to be able to agree on is some principles for making free speech better. And in that spirit, I\u2019ll go first.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 1: Don\u2019t burn flags.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 1989, the\u00a0Supreme Court ruled<\/a>\u00a0that a communist agitator (no, really) named Gregory Lee Johnson had a First Amendment right to burn a flag in protest outside the Republican National Convention. The Supreme Court was right. Johnson was not. Burning flags is an incredibly stupid mode of speech, and you should refrain from it.<\/p>\n

Good free speech tries to express ideas and achieve some positive change with them. And positive change does not include \u201csending people I dislike into a hopping mad rage for the sheer joy of watching their spittle fly.\u201d<\/p>\n

Astute readers may suspect that I am talking about conservative students who invite \u201ctrigger the libs\u201d speakers to campus. Yes, I am \u2014 along with the speakers themselves. This sort of speech is not merely a waste of time; it is not merely beneath the dignity of adults; it is also completely counterproductive.<\/p>\n

People who are actually fond of the thing you are insulting \u2014 whether it\u2019s the American flag, feminism or something else \u2014 take only one message from your speech: The speaker is a jerk. Most people do not want to associate themselves with jerks or the things those jerks support. And people who just don\u2019t care one way or another \u2014 which is to say, your most fertile hunting ground for new supporters \u2014 will look at you spewing a stream of insults and think, \u201cI guess I\u2019ll go listen to someone who actually has something to say.\u201d<\/p>\n

So congratulations, your brave stand against \u2026 whatever \u2026 just made it less likely that any of the things you\u2019re for will ever happen.<\/p>\n

This also applies to protest that isn\u2019t simply pure provocation, like refusing to stand for the national anthem in order to protest police brutality. It\u2019s going to strike many people as disrespectful, if you yourself are an American. You can insist all you want that you\u2019re not disrespecting the anthem, but others are still going to see that way. Which you must know at some level, because if no one cared about the symbol, you wouldn\u2019t bother refusing to honor it. No one protests something they care about by refusing to stand for the Good Humor ice cream jingle.<\/p>\n

When it comes to the anthem, I understand why people might feel inclined to that refusal; I respect their right to refuse. But why handicap yourself before you\u2019ve really gotten into the argument? You should always choose forms of speech that are the most likely, not the least, to get your ideas a warm reception.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 2: Don\u2019t preach to the choir (too much).<\/strong><\/p>\n

We all need affirmation, to vent our frustrations and seek reinforcement from like-minded companions. The appropriate space for this is the privacy of your own home, or a conveniently located bar. It\u2019s not the public square.<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t give yet another speech about how right you are and how dumb your opponents are. Don\u2019t write that article. Don\u2019t send that tweet. Don\u2019t.<\/p>\n

What do you expect to achieve if you spend most of your time convincing people who already agree with you that you\u2019re not just right but really, really, really right? It feels good, I know. I\u2019m told heroin feels good, too. Still not really a productive use of your limited precious hours on this Earth. Which brings us to our third principle:<\/p>\n

Principle No. 3: Don\u2019t confuse your enjoyment with your effectiveness.<\/strong><\/p>\n

When I was in college, I went to a lot of protests for various left-wing causes. I enjoyed them a lot. Chanting in groups is fun, especially when those groups include your friends. I got to feel important, part of something that really mattered.<\/p>\n

Those friends and I exchanged a lot of theories about why protest was so important and effective. But over time, I noticed that it mostly seemed to be effective at building strong networks of people who liked to stand out in the sun and chant. Tangible action seemed to occur elsewhere.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not to say that protest never works. But it is seductively easy to confuse holding a sign with actually having accomplished something. So while protest can build solidarity for positive change, it can also become a substitute for said change. This illusion is particularly damaging when your protest is something that is actually working against your goals, like flag-burning.<\/p>\n

So too with many other forms of less-than-useful speech, such as preaching to the choir. When asking whether your speech is worthwhile, don\u2019t ask whether it makes you, or people like you, feel good. Ask how it makes the people who aren\u2019t like you feel. And don\u2019t cheat by imagining that they probably feel just like you.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 4: Don\u2019t start talking if you aren\u2019t ready for people to talk back.<\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the laziest, most destructive ideas in modern debate is some version of \u201cIt\u2019s time for men to stop talking and listen to women about sexism in the workplace.\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s just one example of a common phenomenon: people saying that we need a \u201cnational conversation\u201d about gender, or race, or some other issue \u2014 and then making it clear that their idea of a \u201cconversation\u201d is that they get to deliver a stiff lecture, while the folks on the other side alternate between listening raptly and apologizing profusely.<\/p>\n

Return to your dictionary and reacquaint yourself with the meaning of the word \u201cconversation.\u201d A conversation is an exchange of ideas. The other party is free to disagree with you. Which is good! They will have information and perspectives that you lack; they are willing to give these to you at absolutely no charge. Take them up on their exciting free offer.<\/p>\n

If you can\u2019t handle hearing \u201cI disagree,\u201d then you are the one who should stop talking. If you open your mouth, prepare to be criticized, often forcefully.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 5: Always explore the option of ignoring provocative speech.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Despite my best efforts here, a lot of people are going to burn flags, actual or rhetorical. Because their highest joy is seeing their opponents turn an exotic shade of purple, they will try to do this as ostentatiously as possible. Quite soon, you will find yourself conferring with like-minded friends, all of them anxiously saying, \u201cWhat are we going to do about it?\u201d<\/p>\n

Have you tried \u201cnothing\u201d? When it comes to responding to people who are trying to provoke you, not responding should always be your first resort, not your last.<\/p>\n

I mean, sure, you can try arguing with them. You can try arguing with your bedroom walls, for that matter, but neither argument is going to do you any good. Provocateurs aren\u2019t looking for a debate; they\u2019re looking for your reaction. The minute you give it to them, they win. The way you win is to happily be doing something else while they\u2019re off talking to the walls.<\/p>\n

And that applies even to people who aren\u2019t being pointlessly provocative but are still making you plenty mad. Look, I get why conservatives think people should stand for the national anthem. But what societal calamity do you really imagine would befall America if you just decided to ignore it? A nation that isn\u2019t strong enough to withstand a little quiet non-patriotism isn\u2019t a nation that deserves to live.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not to say that we should never respond to things that outrage us. But our threshold for doing so should be set to \u201curinating on national monuments on live television,\u201d not \u201csaid something dumb to a student group.\u201d And here we fall seamlessly into my next point:<\/p>\n

Principle No. 6: Don\u2019t go looking for reasons to get mad.<\/strong><\/p>\n

I happened to be talking recently to a doctor who specializes in addiction, and he noted the similarities between people who spend their days cruising the Internet, looking for things to be mad about, and stimulant addicts. Both of them are seeking a quick adrenaline rush. Both of them are doing something that\u2019s literally unhealthy (adrenaline, a key part of your \u201cfight or flight\u201d reflex, takes a long-term toll on your body).<\/p>\n

But oh, rage is intoxicating. It suppresses your anxieties and your petty concerns so that you can focus everything on the main threat. And sometimes rage is necessary to combat some dire threat. But really, not nearly as often as rageful people think. Rage is only good for fighting, never good for boring old democratic tasks such as achieving consensus and compromise. Also, it doesn\u2019t do great things for your judgment.<\/p>\n

But more broadly than that, rage makes a really poor substitute for the ingredients of a good life: joy, meaning, love. Unfortunately, rage is quicker and more reliable than those things. You can get angry in an instant; you need years to build a great marriage. It\u2019s easy, in the moment, to always opt for the quick fix and never get around to the things that make us happier, better people.<\/p>\n

Just how common that short-term thinking is becomes clear when you look at what does well on social media. Feeds skew heavily toward stuff that makes people angry, and we now have a whole media ecosystem designed to feed those algorithms by finding ever more stuff for readers to be mad about. We\u2019re becoming a nation of rage junkies, endlessly seeking our next fix. Like all junkies, we should break the habit.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 7: Try very hard not to punish people for their speech.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Free speech doesn\u2019t, and shouldn\u2019t, mean consequence-free speech. But a healthy society allows for as much free expression as possible, and that means allowing people very wide latitude for holding and expressing opinions we really don\u2019t like. (I mean really, really don\u2019t like. Whatever terrible opinion you are imagining, I mean that one, too.)<\/p>\n

No, your employer doesn\u2019t have to let you harangue the customers with political tirades during working hours, but also, no, your employer shouldn\u2019t go around finding out what you do on your spare time. If people do find out and react badly, said employer doesn\u2019t have to keep you on, but they should anyway if the cost to the institution isn\u2019t too great. There\u2019s no principle that can cover every eventuality, but this one should usually do the trick: Err on the side of giving people freedom of conscience wherever possible.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 8: Try to leave politics at home sometimes.<\/strong><\/p>\n

You\u2019ve decided to support Donald Trump in the 2016 election? Well, I disagree with you, friend, rather vehemently, but I\u2019m sure you have your reasons. And I\u2019m interested in hearing about those reasons. Only please, not during my sister\u2019s wedding.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a place and time for political arguments. But that is not all places and all times. Your message is less apt to be instantly rejected if you deliver it in an appropriate place, and without competing with other stuff that\u2019s really important, like major life events.<\/p>\n

Some places are so dedicated to the free exchange of ideas,\u00a0such as\u00a0college campuses\u00a0and newsrooms, that it\u2019s basically always the right time to say what you think. If you\u2019re in one of those places, opine away. In other places, before you act, ask yourself one question: \u201cHow would I feel if someone who held the opposite views did exactly the same thing in the same place?\u201d If your answer is \u201cI\u2019d be outraged!\u201d then you\u2019re being a jerk. Don\u2019t be a jerk.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 9: Don\u2019t engage with anything for the purposes of mindlessly dismissing it.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The retweet of a political opponent with\u00a0the single remark \u201cLOL\u201d\u2026 The Facebook post that begins \u201cI literally can\u2019t understand how anyone could believe\u201d \u2026 The blog post that consists of saying \u201cCan you believe someone actually said this?\u201d \u2026 This juvenilia is beneath you. For your own sake, eschew it.<\/p>\n

These epigramettes are supposed to imply that this argument is too stupid for you to engage with it. The message that you are actually sending is that you are too stupid to engage with this argument. After all, if you had an actual rebuttal, you\u2019d presumably make it.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 10: Read charitably. Speak charitably.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Two of the worst features of academic writing are wild overcitation and abundant restatements of the obvious. This combination is not simply some odd quirk of the academic mind; academics are writing in a defensive crouch, trying to ward off all possible criticisms that could ever be made of their work.<\/p>\n

Alas, most of us cannot write or speak for an audience composed mostly of a few dozen other people who are getting paid to wade through acres of barren defensive verbiage. So we have some things unsaid and others moderately ambiguous. Which in turn means that a motivated lunatic can go into your essay about reforming Amtrak and come out the other end saying, \u201cSo, what you really mean is, Hitler was right?\u201d<\/p>\n

Are you a lunatic? No? Then don\u2019t do this. Assume that the speaker is a good person who, just like you, wants good things for the world. Seek to understand their motives and thinking, not condemn them. Your aim should always be to pass Bryan Caplan\u2019s \u201cideological Turing test<\/a>\u201d \u2014 to be able to state your opponents\u2019 argument so charitably that they would believe that one of their own was speaking. Only when you really understand an argument can you really reject it, or persuade others to.<\/p>\n

The same holds when you\u2019re writing or speaking about their ideas. Don\u2019t give in to the temptation to make out your opponents as worse than they really are. Engage with their best motives and arguments, not the worst you can imagine.<\/p>\n

Principle No. 11: Never go full-frontal jerk on the Internet.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the early years of blogging, a whole lot of people \u2014 including me \u2014 made the same mistake: They wrote a lengthy screed about how someone was a total idiot who knew nothing about some topic \u2026 only to discover that they had misread the purported idiot, or misunderstood one of the central facts.<\/p>\n

This is a terrible position to be in. If you write, \u201cHere\u2019s where I think X is wrong,\u201d then when X replies, \u201cActually, I think you\u2019ve misread me,\u201d it\u2019s not too embarrassing to respond, \u201cAh! Now I understand the source of our disagreement. Thank you!\u201d<\/p>\n

On the other hand, if you attack them as hapless half-wits of notoriously low moral character, and then it turns out you made a mistake \u2026 well, now you have an ugly dilemma. You can continue to insist that you\u2019re right, in which case, everyone, including you, will know that you\u2019ve made a royal fool of yourself. Or you can deliver an abject, groveling apology, in which case, you will still have made a fool of yourself, but you will have at least proved you\u2019re capable of reform.<\/p>\n

The best way to avoid this situation is not to go full jerk in the first place. More broadly: Never choose any tactic which will, in the event of failure, tempt you to cling to a mistake rather than issue a humiliating apology. Which brings us home round the bend to:<\/p>\n

Principle No. 12: Prepare to be wrong.<\/strong><\/p>\n

If you\u2019re going to speak, you\u2019re going to make mistakes. If you write on the Internet, those mistakes will be around to haunt you for decades. If you don\u2019t want to have to deal with your mistakes, you\u2019d better stay home and argue with the walls.<\/p>\n

The rest of us need a procedure for acknowledging we\u2019ve made a mistake. That procedure starts by recognizing that everyone makes mistakes, and that having made one is not some catastrophic stain that must be hidden from the rest of humanity at all costs. Mistakes are how you learn stuff. Not our favorite way of learning, to be sure, but alas, one of the most effective.<\/p>\n

So prepare to make mistakes and acknowledge that you\u2019ve made them. Do so freely and generously. Apologize to anyone you\u2019ve accidentally slandered, insulted or offended. Resolve to never make that mistake again. Then move onward in your journey of discovery so that you can find out what your next mistake will be.<\/p>\n

And while you should always strive to avoid error, try not to worry about it too much. The rest of us are on exactly the same voyage as you, and hey, maybe we\u2019ll discover something great by mistake, like America.<\/p>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
Megan McArdle is a Washington Post columnist and the author of “The Up Side of Down: Why Failing Well Is the Key to Success<\/a>.”<\/div>\n

<\/i>\u00a0Follow @asymmetricinfo<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0 By\u00a0Megan McArdleMay 28 at 11:49 AM Anti- and pro-Trump protesters clash during competing demonstrations at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in Berkeley,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1029,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1028","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-national-news"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-28_14-24-58.jpg?fit=711%2C472&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8VBh7-gA","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":203,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=203","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":0},"title":"We studied thousands of anonymous posts about the Parkland attack \u2014 and found a conspiracy in the making","author":"Donnie","date":"February 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Florida students announce \u2018March for Our Lives\u2019\u00a0 Students of the Florida school where 17 people died last week announced nationwide marches for gun control on March 24.\u00a0(Patrick Martin\/The Washington Post) By\u00a0Craig Timberg\u00a0and\u00a0Drew Harwell\u00a0February 27 at 7:08 PM\u00a0Email the author Forty-seven minutes after news broke of a high school shooting in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Weapons"","block_context":{"text":"Weapons","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=19"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_13-48-01.jpg?fit=481%2C270&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":901,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=901","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":1},"title":"The White House says Trump can fire Mueller. That should give Republicans heartburn.","author":"Donnie","date":"April 11, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"By\u00a0Jennifer Rubin\u00a0April 11\u00a0 Right Turn \u00a0Opinion Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III after briefing members of the Senate on his investigation into potential collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign on Capitol Hill in June. (Joshua Roberts\/Reuters) The Post reports:\u00a0\u201cDuring Tuesday\u2019s White House briefing, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Presidential Politics"","block_context":{"text":"Presidential Politics","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=12"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/2018-04-11_09-50-28.jpg?fit=666%2C427&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/2018-04-11_09-50-28.jpg?fit=666%2C427&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/2018-04-11_09-50-28.jpg?fit=666%2C427&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":242,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=242","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":2},"title":"North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map","author":"Donnie","date":"January 9, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"By\u00a0ALAN BLINDER\u00a0and\u00a0MICHAEL WINESJAN. 9, 2018 Photo Republican State Senators Dan Soucek, left, and Brent Jackson review historic maps during a special legislative session in 2016 to set North Carolina\u2019s 13 congressional districts.CreditCorey Lowenstein\/The News & Observer, via Associated Press A panel of federal judges struck down North Carolina\u2019s congressional map\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "State Politics"","block_context":{"text":"State Politics","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=13"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_11-41-13.jpg?fit=769%2C510&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_11-41-13.jpg?fit=769%2C510&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_11-41-13.jpg?fit=769%2C510&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_11-41-13.jpg?fit=769%2C510&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":787,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=787","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":3},"title":"Poll: Americans think Big Pharma has even more political clout than the NRA","author":"Donnie","date":"March 23, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"by\u00a0Rachel Bluth, Kaiser Health News MARCH 23, 2018 \u2014 10:38 The recent school shootings in Florida and Maryland have focused attention on the National Rifle Association\u2019s clout in state and federal lobbying activities. \u00a0Yet more than the NRA or even Wall Street, it\u2019s the pharmaceutical industry that Americans think has\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "National News"","block_context":{"text":"National News","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=21"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/2018-03-25_10-33-21.jpg?fit=753%2C379&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/2018-03-25_10-33-21.jpg?fit=753%2C379&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/2018-03-25_10-33-21.jpg?fit=753%2C379&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/2018-03-25_10-33-21.jpg?fit=753%2C379&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1015,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=1015","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":4},"title":"Opinon – The Weasel of Oz","author":"Donnie","date":"May 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0By\u00a0Charles M. Blow\u00a0\u00a0Opinion Columnist\u00a0May 27, 2018 President Trump during a graduation and commissioning ceremony at the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., on Friday.CreditEvan Vucci\/Associated Press Assuming that you have maintained the ability to be astonished by Donald Trump\u2019s antics and insolence,\u00a0The Washington Post\u00a0reported last week that in 2017,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Presidential Politics"","block_context":{"text":"Presidential Politics","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=12"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-28_14-00-39.jpg?fit=668%2C434&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-28_14-00-39.jpg?fit=668%2C434&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/2018-05-28_14-00-39.jpg?fit=668%2C434&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":226,"url":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?p=226","url_meta":{"origin":1028,"position":5},"title":"This is actually what America would look like without gerrymandering","author":"Donnie","date":"January 13, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"By\u00a0Christopher Ingraham\u00a0January 13, 2016\u00a0Email the author \u00a0\u00a0 In his\u00a0State of the Union speech, President Obama called on lawmakers and the public to take a number of steps \"to change the system to reflect our better selves\" for \"a better politics.\" The top\u00a0item on that list was to end partisan gerrymandering:\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "State Politics"","block_context":{"text":"State Politics","link":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/?cat=13"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_14-28-50.jpg?fit=912%2C524&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_14-28-50.jpg?fit=912%2C524&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_14-28-50.jpg?fit=912%2C524&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.gopplaybook.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/2018-03-01_14-28-50.jpg?fit=912%2C524&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1028","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1028"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1028\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1030,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1028\/revisions\/1030"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1029"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1028"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1028"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gopplaybook.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1028"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}