Excellent points all Corey (as usual). I’d like to offer a few more for consideration:

A major contributing factor to the division and anger is the use of pejorative and often vague terms which dehumanize the “other.” Labels. There is too much political and journalistic shorthand — red and blue states, libs, woke, radicals, antifa, socialists, etc. Even MAGA or MAHA. Those labels reduce understanding and increase division (and violence).

For example, while I understand the intent, calling a state — or city or town — red or blue is both inaccurate and misleading. There are plenty of Democrats in “red” localities as well as Independents and people with no political party affiliation. Same with Republicans, Independents, and non-affiliated persons in “blue” localities. There are so-called red states with “blue” elected officials as well, and vice versa. Republican governors with state legislatures that are majority Republican, or split. Are those states accurately described as “red?’

I also take issue with the “More In Common US” study when it poses questions about “wokeness.” What does that term mean — not by dictionary definition, but by the various meanings held by survey respondents? Ask 100 people what “woke” means to them and you’re likely to get many dozens of different responses. So, how can we have an educated and honest discussion when the participants can’t agree on the terms used. I’d argue its much easier to hate, disparage, or disagree with someone marked by a vague label, especially in response to a question and not in direct dialogue with that other person.

Perhaps we could communicate better, and more humanely, if we eschewed labels and vague shorthand terms.