Send Wilk a text with your feedback!
Lura Forcum: The Pleasure of Outrage vs. The Cost of Division
Outrage is addictive—but understanding it may be our way out.
In this powerful episode, Wilk Wilkinson sits down with Lura Forcum to unpack one of the most destructive forces in modern politics: political schadenfreude—the pleasure we take in seeing our rivals upset, angry, or defeated.
A former marketing professor and social psychologist, Lura reveals how this emotional reflex fuels outrage, undermines empathy, and erodes the civic fabric that holds communities together. She also discusses her work at The Independent Center, a hub for the growing number of Americans who feel politically homeless yet still believe in accountability, inclusion, and practical solutions.
Together they explore how independent voters can lead the way toward civic renewal and why we must replace political warfare with authentic conversation and shared purpose.
✅ Outrage is often powered by schadenfreude—the hidden pleasure in others’ pain.
✅ Online culture amplifies division and rewards outrage entrepreneurs.
✅ Millions feel unheard and politically homeless, leading to anger and apathy.
✅ Independent voters expect collaboration, not partisanship.
✅ Human connection is the foundation for civic renewal.
✅ We heal when we trade battles for meaningful dialogue.
🎧 We Made This Political Podcast
💼 LinkedIn | 📸 Instagram | 📘 Facebook
🔗 Fulcrum piece: Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger
💬 Follow Wilk on LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube | Rumble
The world is a better place if we are better people. That begins with each of us as individuals. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for all you’ve got. Make every day the day that you want it to be!
Please follow The Derate The Hate podcast on:
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter(X) , YouTube
Subscribe to us wherever you enjoy your audio or from our site. Please leave us a rating and feedback on Apple podcasts or other platforms. You can share your thoughts or request Wilk for a speaking engagement on our contact page: DerateTheHate.com/Contact
The Derate The Hate podcast is proudly produced in collaboration with Braver Angels — America’s largest grassroots, cross-partisan organization working toward civic renewal and bridging partisan divides. Learn more: BraverAngels.org
Welcome to the Derate The Hate Podcast!
*The views expressed by Wilk, his guest hosts &/or guests on the Derate The Hate podcast are their own and should not be attributed to any organization they may otherwise be affiliated with.
Transcript is AI generated and may contain errors
[00:00:00:00] Wilk Wilkinson: Ever notice that satisfying feeling when the other side loses or melt meltdown online? That little jolt of pleasure has a name. Schadenfreude. And it's quietly destroying how we connect as Americans. In this episode, I am joined by Lura Forcum to unpack the psychology of political joy in others pain and how we can move from outrage to empathy before it's too late. Welcome back, my friends, for the Derate the Hate podcast. I'm your host, Wilk Wilkinson, your blue collar sage calming outrage and helping to navigate a world divided by fog and those who would spread that fear, outrage and grievance. The Derate the Hate podcast is proudly produced in collaboration with Braver Angels, America's largest grassroots cross. Partizan organization working towards civic renewal. This podcast amplifies the mission that we share to foster a more respectful and united America where civic friendship thrives even when we disagree. Each week, through the power of story, conversation, and connection with incredible guests, we work to build bridges instead of barriers, not to change minds on the issues, but to change how we see one another when we differ. Because friends, it really is about bettering the world one attitude at a time. We did not create the hate, but together we can Derate the Hate. So be sure to subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Share it with a friend and visit Braver angels.org to learn how you can get involved in the movement to bridge the partizan divide. Friends, I am so incredibly grateful that you have joined me for another powerful Derate the Hate episode. So let's get to it. Today I'm joined by Lura Forcum, founder and executive director of the Independent Center, the go to organization for information, research and engagement with America's politically independent voters. Lura is also a former marketing professor with a PhD in consumer psychology. She uses insights from social psychology to help leaders understand how people think, connect, and make decisions about policy and governance. She's also the co-host of the podcast We Made This Political alongside our friend Lauren Hall. I was recently a guest on that podcast. Lura is the coauthor of the compelling article in The Fulcrum on political schadenfreude, the pleasure we take in our rivals, outrage and suffering. In this conversation, we dig into how that subtle emotional reflex fuels the outrage, economy, deepens tribalism, and keeps us divided for profit. We explore why so many people feel politically homeless. How independent voters could reshape our civic engagement, and what it takes to rebuild real human connection in a world addicted to conflict. This one cuts deep into the psychology of outrage, but it points us back towards hope. Let's get into it with my friend Lura Forum. Here we go. Lura Forcum. Welcome to the Derate the Hate podcast, my friend. So good to see you.
[00:03:54:05] Lura Forcum: Thank you for having me, Wilk.
[00:03:55:04] Wilk Wilkinson: Definitely glad to see you. I've been waiting to, Waiting to make this happen for a while. For the Derate the Hate listeners that don't know you run the Independent Center and, and you just you've always got, some very thought provoking things coming out. I know we've been following each other for a while on, on LinkedIn and and then and then you do do a great podcast as well. And, and so yeah, thank you for joining me today. So the topic of conversation today, Lura, is going to be outrage because there, this this there's an article that you wrote called Taking Outrage Seriously Understanding the Moral Signs Behind Political Anger. And and when you had reached out, the word that you had used was schadenfreude, which is one that I don't hear quite, you know, very often anymore. But but immediately when you said it, it kind of clicked for me because as the right the hate listeners know, I talk about fear, outrage and grievance quite often. And and then the idea that that people there are actually people out there that take, take a certain amount of pleasure in pissing other people off. It's it's bothersome. I mean, it's something that we don't want to think about. I don't want to think about it as somebody who would love to believe that, that people are generally good. But let's dive into that. What did you mean when you reached out to me and said, there's far too much schadenfreude in politics?
[00:05:38:12] Lura Forcum: Yeah. You know, it's it's funny because we don't have an English word for this emotion, but I think everybody knows exactly what this feels like. Right? Like this is delight when other people are suffering. And when I was noticing this and starting to notice this and the political environment, you know, one of the, kind of surprising contrasts is like it feels really good, right, to like, look at somebody else that you dislike doing badly and go, yeah, I like I'm a little delighted. But it's really it's really bad for us. And so I, I actually reached out to a colleague of mine, Kurt Gray, who is, professor now at Ohio State. He's a psychologist, an expert on morality. And he had written a book about outrage. And I said, have you ever thought about, you know what it means if we are delighted when somebody else is outraged and, you know, I see more and more of that in our, in our political discourse, right where it's like, oh, if liberals are upset, then you've owned the libs, right? You have. You succeeded in provoking them. It's funny. It's not a cause for concern or sympathy. And the same is true on the other side, right? Like, just some really unkind language, right? Like the tears of white men or the tears of white women. Right? Is this some one of the things I've heard come from the other side? That's just, it's really like, dismissive. It's and it's it's a strange thing if we're thinking about the social fabric and civic fabric of the country, to look at your fellow citizens being deeply upset or concern and, and go, oh, yeah, score. Put, put a, you know, put a score down for us at a point to our column.
[00:07:37:00] Wilk Wilkinson: Right? Yeah. I mean, when we think about that and, you know, it's okay when you're talking about sports, right. And, and and I'm a Vikings fan. So I'm used to, used to being in misery. But but the reality is is when we're watching sports and and there's, there's everybody's probably got that team that, that they don't like. And when that team is doing poorly and, and their best receiver or whatever drops the ball, we take pleasure in that. But when, when we start to take pleasure in, in, in civic culture and those that we feel are on the opposing side, and when they fail in some way or they become angry, they're outraged, or they have a legitimate fear about a particular thing, and we find that to be funny or take some kind of pleasure out of the pain that they are in, that's a different thing. That's a whole entirely different thing. And it's it's a very scary thing when when I think about it, because as a human condition, if we are taking pleasure in a particular thing, eventually we don't just take pleasure in it. We try to actively make that happen and and as I think about it, Lura, that is that is one of these things that I don't I don't want to see more of that as a country. I don't want to and I and like you said, this is not into you know, this is not exclusive to one side or the other. We're seeing far too much of it today. And politics, instead of working together, we take pleasure in the other side failing or take pleasure in them becoming so frustrated because they, you know, we won't work with them. So. So talk to me then about, I mean, where do you think this thing started? I mean, what are the origins of this mentality? Because I don't think it's always been that way.
[00:09:42:05] Lura Forcum: No. Certainly not. You know, it actually has really ancient origins because a lot of what we're talking about here are in-group and outgroup dynamics. And I know we talk a lot about tribalism and politics, but, a kind of related idea from social psychology is that we have both in groups and outgroup and groups are, you know, the people closest to you, your family, maybe your close community. And these are people that you are cooperative with. You share resources with each other. There's a really high degree of trust. And you, you tend to kind of like give to them with the expectation that, like, you're all going to benefit together. Right? So this is a very like collaborative, cooperative set of relationships. And then you have outgroups and outgroups are the people that, you know, a long time ago would have been other tribes that you fight with and compete with over resources. Right. So these are like very distant others. And I think it's helpful to think in these terms rather than just tribes, because tribes are kind of like neutral, right? Like if you're all just in groups, then then that doesn't tell you much about how people are going to behave. But if you know that the other side is an outgroup, that brings with it a lot of implications for how you look at their behavior and how you interpret it. And that's, I think, the really important difference in how people see outrage. Right? Because if it's your in-group that's outrage, you're going to join in. You're going to say like, yeah, I'm mad too. We're going to be mad together, and we're going to do something about it. We're going to we're we're sort of energized and motivated, motivated together. But that same outrage when it's coming from an outgroup has a totally different implication, right? It doesn't mean like, oh, I need to feel the same way you do. It means, wow, we maybe we're winning, especially where we have this, like two party system, right? Where it's kind of like if if you lose, I win, right? Winner take all very competitive, very adversarial.
[00:11:52:20] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. It becomes this this zero sum game between between us and them and and as long as it's them that outraged then then we are somehow scoring points. So let's talk about that us versus them thing. Right. Because I mean originally the, you know, the tribalism thing or being in small tribes, we would join these tribes to, to, to find a way to we would cohabitate with these tribes so that we would not be eaten by the lions and tigers and bears. Right. what do you think drives the. And I mean, I know in my opinion what the cure is going to be, but or one of the, the cures. But what do you think drives that mentality now, today, Lura, the the tribal nature or the US versus them. How why do I have to feel like I need to be part of this team now and feel so strongly about being part of this team that I am going to then hate that team?
[00:13:07:08] Lura Forcum: You know, I think, I think there are a lot of causes. I think online culture is a big part of it because and, you know, I was actually talking about this with with our friend Lauren Hall today, on our podcast, the thing about online culture is that it's it's more lasting and visible to us because when you go see the comments, people left on a social media post or right, like the means that they shared those, stay there and you can refer back to them and you notice them later. And a lot of people are going to see them. Right. And and that adversarial winner take. All right. Like just really destructive type of interaction is a lot more visible than the thing that actually you and I probably have on a regular basis, which is you stop and talk to the neighbor and ask them how they're doing. You help get something off of a shelf for somebody in the grocery store. You let them go in front of you at the post office, and you have these little exchanges right where, like, you're able to be pro-social and helpful and constructive, but nobody sees that, right? What what they see and what we're steeped in is this online life that's very combative. And I think too, that, you know, the political parties and elected officials have realized that people respond in a very predictable way to messaging that involves, that elicit elicits outrage, for example, right. Or is framed in the zero sum games, or zero sum terms. If I'm, if I'm a political marketer and I want to know, I want to really be able to to to send out a message that will get people to the polls or get them to give money. I know that this outrage inducing language is the most effective thing I can do, and so it's become very profitable. It gets money, it gets attention, it gets political power for people. So it's just this, like reinforcing dynamic. And the problem is it's absolutely shredding the social fabric of the country.
[00:15:22:05] Wilk Wilkinson: It's absolutely, absolutely shredding the, the fabric of our country, the social fabric. That's why I talk about the fear, outrage and grievance so often. It's that proven model. You talk about marketing, Lura, the the fear, outrage and grievance model. So slow sells. So it generates clicks like like like nothing. We we could have possibly imagined the the rush that I think people get that that small dopamine hit, you know, endorphin rushes from becoming angry about a particular thing. Keep us coming back for more. The outrage entrepreneurs and what I call outrage entrepreneurs. Amanda Ripley called them, you know, conflict entrepreneurs whatever. There's like I said, this is a proven model that people have come to know and and be able to trust to get their get their message across and keep them coming back for more. Just like a just like a dealer of any kind of any kind of drug because it's it is that outrage is kind of a drug. But and I think people that do this work, this, this depolarization work, this bridging work that we do need to look at it as such and, and, and I think one of the, one of the points that I saw in your, your article that made a lot of sense was, is take the outrage seriously, one of the biggest unmet human conditions that we have today in this toxic, especially in this toxic online environment that people live in too much is that that people really feel unheard. They they, they feel unheard and they lose their sense of agency because they feel unheard. And once they've lost their sense of agency, they get this feeling of powerless powerlessness that that then turns into anger, that anger and outrage then manifests itself into a, into a much worse thing. So I think the point that you make about taking outrage seriously is hugely important. So dive into that for me a little bit.
[00:17:33:02] Lura Forcum: Yeah. Actually, I wrote about this last week in my newsletter where I said the same thing you did, which is that we're in this epidemic of people feeling unheard. And, you know, when you're not heard, it tells people that they're not important, they're not worth listening to. It makes them feel like they have no agency. You know, it just it kind of, invalidates them at all kinds of levels. And also when you're unheard, it's like you're an unknown. You can't belong as yourself because nobody knows who you actually are. And it's ironic, I think for all the time that we spend, you know, typing comments and text messaging and consuming content, we spend so much time interacting on social media. And yet it's not that the actual true human connection that people are nourished by you know, it's like junk food you can fill up on social media, interaction and not have that deeper need for connection met at all. So I think, yeah, we have this entire nation of people who are feeling unheard on an interpersonal level, right? Where it's like, you know, people are telling me that the ideas I have make me a bad person, right? Which is a really, destabilizing way to feel about yourself. But also politically, I think they feel unheard because it's like we we find it harder and harder to participate in the political process in a way that elected officials are responding to. You know, if if you're if you can't vote out candidates because you disagree with them because of gerrymandered districts, right, like you don't feel like your voice can register politically. If you if elected officials aren't going to hold town halls, how are you going to go tell them what you think or hear their explanation for the things that they're doing? So, I, I agree with you completely. I think we are I think we're seeing the effects of just millions and millions of Americans feeling really deeply unheard. So that's that's kind of always my starting point with people is, you know, we need to hear things people are saying. We don't have to agree with them. Right? We could we can say like, well, that's interesting. I hear what you're saying. I think about it this way, but we do need to, to to give attention to good faith arguments and entertain good faith arguments. And if your answer to any critique is going to be that hate speech, right, or this is your bigotry, right, then like that's not a relationship. And I think my my point is always like civic relationships are relationships in a very similar way to any other relationship you have right now. You have to hear people or you can't have a relationship, right? If you're going to decline to hear people, then then you're no longer in a relationship.
[00:20:36:10] Wilk Wilkinson: No, that's absolutely right. When we dismiss somebody else's, when we dismiss out of hand what somebody else has said or why they, you know what they believe without actually asking why they believe what they believe, that is that is the fastest way. And this is one of the things that I've talked so much about is that is the fastest way to make sure that they are not going to listen to you. And that's how we end up, you know, further apart, bigger trenches, stronger silos. Is is if I'm not going to take the time to listen to what you have to say, and I'm just going to dismiss you out of hand because you are a part of that group. Then I can only expect that you are not going to listen to me either. And then we end up further and further apart. I mean, one of the most, one of the most influential lines that I've heard since I have been in, in this bridging space and doing this work. Lura is is from Monica Guzman in her book. I Never Thought of It that way. And in her TEDx talk, she talks, she says those who are underrepresented in our life will be overrepresented in our mind and our imagination. And I always talk about that. I take that to the next step and say, once we start to imagine who that person is without actually knowing who they are, but only knowing that they think about things differently than I do, I'm not imagining the best things about them, and the more I imagine bad things about them, the more my ignorance grows, the more my anger and outrage grows for their positions. When I don't actually understand or truly understand what their positions are, or why they came to believe what they believe. And eventually, like you said, if we just dismiss something they said out of hand as hate speech or bigotry or whatever the case may be now, everything that they have, everything that they have to say gets lumped into that same, that same ugly bucket. And I don't truly know who they are. I only know what my perception of them is. I want to go back to that true human connection thing. You talked about, though, because I think it's very important in the context of, of silos and separating ourselves from people, because when we do actually and I want you to talk about this when we do, like I say, give up, give up our space in line at the post office, or hold the door for somebody, or grab something down off the shelf at the grocery store. That part of that human connection doing for others, providing value in that interpersonal relationship, whether it be for a microsecond or whatever, that that meets that human need, not only for that person but for us. Talk about that, because that's an important element that I think people have lost. And then we'll take that one step further into what you were talking about politicians not holding town halls anymore and pretending like they have a relationship with their constituents. This is my words, not yours. But because of the ugliness, this faux connection that the online ecosystem has provided. So. So start with the start with the grocery store, post office, that connection, that human connection. And and then translate that into why it would be or why it is so important that politicians actually interact with their constituents.
[00:24:26:15] Lura Forcum: Yeah. I mean, you know, we we evolved for in-person interactions. We this is something that, you know, my my training in consumer psychology, the parent field is social psychology. And I can really nerd out about the just incredible number of cognitive abilities we have that let us effortlessly interact with other people. The thing is, those came about through in-person interaction, not screen. Right? Like not screen mediated interaction. So, you know, you you might not notice this all the time, but like when you pass somebody on the street, you will have an instantaneously formed, non-conscious ability to tell if this person means to harm you or help you, and then how likely they are to carry out that intention. Intention, right? So like you can tell if they are warm towards you and able to do positive things or not able, it's called the stereotype content model, which this is not a negative use of stereotype, but it's called the stereotype content model. And it's this kind of background program that's running in our brains all the time. So this is just one example of like all these capabilities we have where we are very successful at interacting with other people in a way that's successful for both of us. And that means that, you know, you can go and, you can have a hard conversation with somebody face to face and you know what to do with your body or your tone, right, or eye contact in order to make that go better. And if you watch people talking, if you like to, people watch like I do. You can see this in all kinds of settings and you'll be like, wow, like there's a really big guy, right? Like maybe you know, this, there's a really big guy. I see how he changes his posture when he talks to an older woman, like an old lady or a little kid, right? Like he changes his body. And that would be very different if he was being met with somebody who is more aggressive. Right. So this is all happening instantaneously without us thinking about it like this is how incredible our, our capabilities are for relating to other people. So I feel like people have, like you were saying, created these silos where they think, you know, it's so dangerous. I can't have I go out and talk to these people. I'm in a red city or blue city and they're going to they're terrible. I don't want to talk to them. No, you you can actually you can go talk to them. You guys can achieve things together. And I feel like that is maybe one of the lessons we've we've missed is that we can where we have a shared goal. You know, we can work together even if we disagree. And that's one of the things I think is really ironic about asking elected officials or asking Washington to solve the problems of political polarization and escalating political violence. Right, is because these are actually the people who cannot talk to each other. Right across difference. They cannot reach across the aisle. But in my community, I see people all the time working together across differences. Right? I see the city council, the town council being able to solve real problems. We we're going to pave the roads. We're going to make sure the schools are working. We are, you know, we're going to have the fall harvest fest here in a few weeks in Pendleton, South Carolina. And it doesn't matter whether we agree about who should, you know, who's who's the best party for presidency, right? Because we have other goals. Right. And I think this is the incredible thing about just ordinary Americans is, yeah, they they absolutely know how to work together across differences. Maybe Washington should learn from everyday Americans.
[00:28:34:17] Wilk Wilkinson: Washington should absolutely learn from everyday Americans. But I, I think the point that you make with a lot of the politicians, especially those that now, you know, work in Washington and spend very little time with their constituency and in their districts and things like that, you know, and to say, oh, yeah, well, of course I interact with them via email or, or virtual town halls and things like that. But, but that, that interpersonal communication, that, that true relationship that they have with their constituency and things. And I think the point that you make about gerrymandering and then and then that adding to the feeling of being unheard by by so many, you know, if if we if and again, this is not exclusive to one side of the political spectrum or another. But but we have politicians, right now, especially in the wake of the political violence that we've seen recently, you know, making statements like, well, it's clear now that we cannot coexist with the other side. Well, imagine that that's the representative from your district and and maybe your district is 60% red and you're in the 40% or whatever. You know, I, we don't even need to attach a color to it. But imagine that that's your representative and you know that that is going to remain your representative because you live in a district that is solidly for that one side. But now you are being told that that that representative can't coexist with people who think like you do. What do you think that leads to? I mean, and I'm not asking you, but I'm just the American people have to realize that we have to elect better leaders and not ones that are going to exclude people on the other side, or make statements like, we cannot coexist with the other side. One of the things that I and I know we're getting close to the end of our time here, Lura, but the Independence Center, you said before that the future is not between blue and red. It's the independent center. It's the people in the middle. There's you know, we were talking about our friend earlier, Shannon Watson, who who runs a organization called majority in the middle. You know, just because people say they're an independent or or in the middle doesn't mean they can't hold to their convictions about one side or the other, right? I mean, oh, I talk a little bit about that because I think, I think a lot of times people get very worried because they're like, well, I, I can't call myself in the middle because I, you know, I lean more red or I lean more blue. Talk a little bit about that as we wrap up our time, talk about what you do at the Independence Center. And, and then a little bit about, you know, the podcast that you and Lauren Hall do. And then about your about your newsletter.
[00:31:51:14] Lura Forcum: Sure. So the Independence Center is for people who are basically just nonpartisan. We're not telling people necessarily to vote third party. We are. We're here for the 43% of Americans who say that they don't feel at home in either party. Because I think these are a lot of the people who would tell you they feel unheard by our politics. And, and it's to me, really troubling the extent to which the two parties and also the media to some extent have this message that if you're an independent, if you're not one of the parties, it's because you're a spoiler or you're undecided or you're uninformed about politics. And what I can tell you after, you know, spending the past year talking to independent voters is no, these are actually the people that have the the most, the highest expectations for what our government can be for what elected officials can be. And they don't see one party or the other as having all the answers. And what they really expect is that government works. They understand that policymaking is complicated, you know, and that what what's going to make good policy is not one side or the other getting its way, but coming together through consensus to come up with the best possible policies and solutions to problems that are really complicated. You know, when we're talking about fixing our deficit, we're talking about, you know, modernizing the immigration system, dealing with our health care system. These are really complicated problems that are not going to be solved by Band-Aid, bills that get passed, in a short amount of time, right. Like this is going to take ongoing work and collaboration across the aisle. So, so a lot of the time these nonpartisan voters, it's not that they just vote third party. What they do is they swing vote and they split ticket vote because these are the people who, like, have really high expectations for what elected officials can be and what our politics can be like. And we think they're so important for getting the country back on track, depolarizing, you know, bringing accountability back to government because we know that Partizan partizans aren't worried that their side isn't doing what they said. They're not going to hold their side accountable. They just want to win. So, you know, we we welcome anybody who wants to join us. We don't have litmus tests. we always say like, if you lean red, you lean blue, you know, you're still welcome to sit with us. We're people who have questions about what's good policy and what our what we want the country to be like. And so that's what we're doing at the Independence Center. We're trying to create a movement of people who are not partizans, but still know and feel like they belong in our political system.
[00:35:03:00] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. And another thing that I've seen you, you write before is, is focus on conversations and not battles. And I think that's a hugely important thing, especially in the environment that we're in right now. Is, is like and one of the big things that I keep going back to is, is and is the importance of the conversation. I mean, we are always going to have our disagreements, and there's going to be times when we can't find common ground on certain things. But what really separates the adults in the room, in my opinion, is, is our ability to at least have that conversation when we know that common ground may not be found, but we can have that conversation on a content contentious issue in a non contentious way come to some kind of real, you know, maybe we come to a compromise, maybe we come to a true synergy where we find something that's better than the sum of its parts. But the reality is, is we aren't going to get either place unless we have the conversation to begin with. So, so organizations like the Independence Center and doing, doing this work is incredibly important. I'm so glad that I'm so glad that you took the time to join me here today. Lura. We could we're going to have a lot of conversations going forward. I get no doubt about that, because I know this one could go on for hours and hours and, and but thank you so much. Is is there any just any parting words for the listeners that you'd like to toss out there. And then and then we'll wrap this one up and we'll look forward to the next one.
[00:36:40:02] Lura Forcum: Well, thanks so much for having me. Wilk, I'm a big fan of Derate the Hate, and, I just really appreciate the work that you're doing. I've been so impressed with the, the guests that you have on your show. So I'm very humbled to, to get to join this esteemed company. But thank you for the work you're doing. I, I just have it's incredible to meet the people in the space who are saying the kinds of things that you're saying, which is like, hey, you know, we we can get this back on track. We have the things we need to to repair our civic fabric. So thank you. And and thanks for the conversation. I'm looking forward to the next one.
[00:37:22:09] Wilk Wilkinson:
I love that message of hope. We do have what it takes to get this back on track and repair our the fabric of our nation. Thank you so much Lura Forcum check out an Independent Center, and again we'll look forward to the next one. Thank you so much. Friends, I want to thank you so much for tuning in. And if there's anything in this episode that provided exceptional value to you, please make sure to hit that share button. If you haven't done so already, please be sure to subscribe to get the Derate the Hate podcast sent to your email inbox every week. We really are better together, so please take a moment to visit Braver angels.org and consider joining the movement towards civic renewal and bridging our political divides. This is Wilk wrapping up for the week saying get out there. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for everything you've got. And remember, it's up to you to make every day the day that you want it to be. With that, my friends, I'm going to back on out of here and we will catch you next week.
Comments & Upvotes