Civil Version: "She and I seem to embrace very different value systems."
It's ironic. And soul-nourishing. Donald Trump just may be the force of change in restoring civility, at least in rhetoric. That could be the biggest threat to lawyers since the attempts in the late 20th century at tort reform. (Remember that?)
The tipping point in the march back to civility had been the third debate. As myriad observers have noted, he started out being civil. He exercised verbal restraint and even in his facial expressions and body language demonstrated respect for the democratic process. Then, he lost it. That included referring to his opponent as a "nasty woman."
We heard. We saw. And the ah-ha gestalt was: This is ugly. Let's not do this.
For some time now in the front lines of the return to civility have been leaders such as David Murray in speechwriting and Bob Dilenschneider in public affairs.
Incidentally, my 12-step recovery group in Austintown, Ohio has banned profanity in speaker and discussion meetings. At our Socrates Society, which also meets in Austintown, facilitator Shirley Bartlett manages to keep the flow of opposing views civil.
In commercial terms that means increased demand for the more traditional speechwriter. We had served executives in that era when scripting was restrained.
In those days, it was fashionable to whine about all the approval channels a speech had to go through. We would have knock-down battles with the organization's legal staff.
But the delivered material never ran into the threat of litigation. And it didn't damage the speaker's branding. Speakers, audiences, and organization staff, including lawyers, all joined hands in a kind of Happy Valley.
Trumpism won't vanish on election day. It seems he will contest the results. So, offensive rhetoric will still fill the land. But, that will end. There could be a new golden era of respectful discourse. In itself, that prevents lawsuits. Such a development would, of course, have a negative impact on lawyers.