The 2024 presidential elections results show, clearly, that Vashon is a deep-blue island, in a lighter blue county, in an even lighter blue state, in a country that is largely purple — shading this election toward red.

What should we make of living within a blue bubble, where most of the islanders we know share the same very liberal political beliefs and vote solidly Democrat?

First, not all Vashon residents are Democrats, and not all island Democrats are “ultra-liberal” Democrats.

Twelve percent of the 8,240 islanders who voted in the 2024 presidential election voted Republican, and four percent voted for third party candidates. That means that 1,309 islanders who voted did not share the attitudes of the other 6,931 islanders who voted Democrat.

To be sure, some of them voted for third party candidates well to the left of the Democrats, and some voted for parties well to the right of the Republicans. What’s significant to me is that more than 1,000 of my fellow islanders see the world politically in very different ways than I do.

This is not only a Vashon issue. It is an issue for all Americans, as we confront increasingly divisive politics that arise from a glut of information, fragmenting into more and more separated sources. Not all are news in any traditional definition of the word, but they all represent themselves as newsworthy and thus contribute to the development of alternative realities that compete for acceptance as “the” real world.

This is nothing new. With the development of each new communications technology, the world has struggled with these same issues. When printing presses first put ink to paper, when radio first transmitted, when television began broadcasting, and when the internet emerged — each time, society has struggled to separate reality from fiction.

In each case, society developed protocols, sometimes legal, sometimes social, that attempted to constrain the unregulated impact of these new media. These constraints took time, and the development of some kind of consensus for them effective. Libel and slander laws, and governmental regulation of the airways, are good examples of developed constraints.

Those constraints have been much looser with the internet. Yet we see attempts to create “net neutrality” and other forms of regulations emerging as we watch our societies and cultures devolve into seemingly implacable conflicts, based upon our inability to agree on the “facts.”

So what can we as islanders, living on a “deep blue” island, do to find common ground with nearly half of the rest of the nation, more than one-third of fellow Washingtonians, and one-eighth of our fellow islanders? I have always believed that what divides us is much less significant than what binds us together as a nation and as a people, and yet at this moment, that belief is on trial.

Can we find that common ground that appeals to what Abraham Lincoln spoke of as “the better angels of our nature,” and work to forge what the United States Constitution calls “a more perfect union?”

I think we can. We just need to take the first steps to make it happen.

First, recognize and respect the anti-establishment spirit of this political moment, when all sides of the political spectrum are highly suspicious of each other.

Second, as Atlantic writer Peter Wehner advocates, “Do not give up on truth,” and do “guard your soul” by not descending into hate.

Third, arrange to sit down and talk with an islander whose political beliefs are different from yours. All you have to do is ask. Do not argue about who is right or wrong, about facts, or about false equivalencies. Instead, seek to find what you agree on about what is good and right about the island, about the region, about the country, and about the world. Those agreements can build the beginnings of a conversation.

Fourth, ask each other what you see as the most important “clear and present danger” to America and American culture. This is a delicate exercise, to try to understand how differently you may see the world around us.

I agree with Carolyn Lukensmeyer, Executive Director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona, and the answer she gave when asked if she was “optimistic or pessimistic about where we are and our ability to get out of it.”

“It all depends on what I pay attention to,” Lukensmeyer said. “If I watch the president’s tweets, if I watch the national narrative, if I watch social media, I’m very pessimistic about our ability to get beyond this and out of it. But if I pay attention to what we have the privilege of seeing in communities all over this nation on a regular basis, the vast majority of Americans … actually have a hunger to be connected across the divides.”

Start building those connection right here on Vashon, right here with your fellow islanders, and right now.

Bruce Haulman is an island historian.