Oxford Dictionaries names "post-truth" Word of the Year

This is an astonishing reflection of the state of public discourse in 2016:

Oxford Dictionaries on Wednesday said 2016 was best characterized by a word that questions the concept of facts themselves: post-truth. The dictionary publisher defined post-truth as "relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."

Sigh.

Again: "Objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."

He says he's going to build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it. It's not true. It's not going to happen. It doesn't matter. It makes a frightened soul feel good to hear him say it.

He says he's going to deport 11 million people. It's not going to happen. But to some non-marginal segment of the population, it's a thrilling idea. Ban all Muslims from entering the country? Nice. Lock her up for something the FBI publicly states is not a criminal act? Sure, feels great to hear.

Global warming is a hoax. Never mind that the science is proven. If you don't want to hear it, you don't have to believe it. Welcome to post-truth.

Thankfully, there are still hard-working citizens, public servants, journalists, academics and institutions that are pushing back against this crazy notion. A clear majority of Americans voted to repudiate such toxic beliefs, despite what the electoral college has decided.

But the era of post-truth is upon us. Let it be short-lived.

Americans chose Clinton, but got Trump

At the moment, Clinton's lead in the popular vote is only about 200,000+ votes. But it will certainly grow as additional votes on the West Coast get counted.

NBC News makes an important point regarding this stunning election result.

• Trump's popular vote loss likely won't constrain his effective power as president, especially with the unified GOP control of Congress — just as it didn't seem to hem in George W. Bush. But if the candidate who got fewer votes wins the White House for the second time in five elections, it could put a new spotlight on the peculiar way that America picks its presidents — one not shared by any other democracy.

The only time a Republican candidate has won the popular vote since 1988 was 2004. Yet the GOP has managed to win the White House two other times -- in 2000 and now 2016.

The biggest takeaway from this election is the furthering of the much-discussed polarization problem between urban and rural voters. It's two countries in one united map. Diverse, educated urban voters in metropolitan areas and less-educated and less-diverse voters in rural areas have enormous differences of opinion.

If President-elect Donald Trump has any ambition to find ways to bridge this gap and solve this threat to our great nation's unity and character, he hasn't exhibited it yet. Let's hope we see signs through staff and cabinet appointments (and public statements going forward) that he is less vindictive and more committed to bringing us together.

Is he at all humbled by the weight of his place in history after losing to Clinton among a majority of Americans? Only time will tell.