A deeply personal decision made in the days following a contentious election has drawn attention to the growing strain political divides place on American families. Author Andrea Tate described how an unexpected emotional shock led her to cancel Thanksgiving and Christmas after discovering that her husband and his family supported the candidate she believed posed a threat to values she held closely.
The moment unfolded early the morning after election results were finalized. Tate, who had long been politically active and deeply invested in issues affecting vulnerable communities, recalled feeling an immediate sense of devastation. The reaction went beyond typical disappointment, leaving her unable to get out of bed as she scrolled through reactions, arguments, and celebrations across her social timelines. In that swirl of online tension, she unfriended people she had once considered permanent fixtures in her life — a sign of how personally she felt the impact of the outcome.
Then she discovered the post her own husband had shared: “God Bless America. God bless #45, 47.”
The cheerful message, expressing joy over a result that left her shaken, felt to her like an emotional rupture. She described physically distancing herself, unable to process how someone she loved could feel so differently about a moment she saw as alarming.
Overwhelmed and unable to speak without breaking down, she sent a text message. She first asked him to remove the post “out of respect” for her and those in her community who felt threatened. Moments later, she set a boundary she never expected to declare: “Tell your family I love them, but I will not be coming for Thanksgiving, and I won’t be hosting Christmas. I need space.”
For Tate, the decision was not fueled by anger. She viewed it as an act of emotional self-preservation. She later expressed that she could not attend gatherings where she felt compelled to “pretend everything is normal,” adding that she would not “pass the turkey to people who voted against my values.”
Her husband did not argue or attempt to change her mind. Despite his deep appreciation for family holidays, he quietly accepted her choice and approached her later with reassurance rather than defensiveness. Tate apologized for stepping back from the holidays but remained firm. As she explained to him, “I cannot pretend like I did with Hillary,” and “I cannot bite my tongue this time.”
To Tate, this moment represented a moral crossroads rather than a political disagreement. She wrote: “I will not unwrap gifts from people who support policies that hurt the vulnerable,” and “I refuse to smile across the table at those who voted for actions that strip away women’s reproductive rights.”
Yet she emphasized that her husband was not a harsh or unkind person. Instead, she described him as thoughtful, gentle, and deeply caring — a reality that made the divide even more painful. “His goodness made it more painful. How could this man — this caring man — do something I found so morally wrong?” she wrote.
In the weeks that followed, holidays passed in silence. Tate spent Thanksgiving at home while her husband visited his parents, and Christmas unfolded without a tree, lights, or family gathering. She acknowledged that the solitude brought both relief and sadness. But it also clarified her belief that emotional boundaries, though difficult, can be necessary.
By early January, the couple began having open, careful conversations about the divide that had shaken their home. They spoke not with accusations but with vulnerability, acknowledging the fears, intentions, and misunderstandings that had shaped their reactions. Through these conversations, Tate recognized that love is not defined by the absence of conflict but by the willingness to work through it. Both partners began focusing on how to maintain respect, protect their emotional landscapes, and rebuild trust without pretending their differences no longer existed.
In time, they established new holiday traditions and new ways of communicating. Tate realized she did not need her husband to share every political belief; she needed him to understand the weight those beliefs carried for her. He, in turn, began seeing that her reaction stemmed from fear and conviction, not rejection.
Tate’s experience mirrors a challenge felt across many American households, where political polarization has strained gatherings, friendships, and long-held traditions. Her story highlights the complex intersection of personal values and intimate relationships, illustrating that even strong marriages can face profound emotional tests during times of national division.
Reflecting on the year, Tate wrote: “I couldn’t change what happened. But I could decide what I would tolerate going forward. I acted with honesty, love, and yes — anger. And from that, we learned how to move forward together.”
Her journey underscores a broader truth: political differences may shake the foundations of relationships, but they do not inevitably destroy them. With boundaries, empathy, and honest dialogue, couples can find ways to navigate even the most difficult divides.
