One thing that has been said many times in the last two weeks by many politicians is that, right now, there are no political parties. 

The usual bitter partisan tactics employed by both Republicans and Democrats have been replaced by a tone of conciliation and a show of unity. We’ve seen and heard things that would have been unbelievable before. President Bush embraces Tom Daschle at his speech to Congress. Hillary Clinton praises Rudy Guiliani for his grace in tragedy. Members of Congress sing “God Bless America” together on the steps of the Capitol. 

Whether it’s just for the cameras or a genuine change in feelings toward one another, we’ll never really know. One thing is for certain, however. 

It will never last. 

At heart, we are a divisive country. The United States has a two party system. It was designed that way, by our forefathers, because anything else would have just been too darned complicated. 

You’re a conservative or a liberal. You’re for big government or small government. You’re pro-life or pro-choice. You’re for guns or against them. There’s no middle ground. Anyone who tries to take an in-between position or even hints at compromise is labeled a weakling and a waffler.

But even though there is no fiery debate in Washington, D.C. right now, a long lasting debate continues to rage among Americans in all walks of life.

Is it soda or is it pop?

What you call your soft drink defines you as a person. For some, it’s nearly as important as their religion or political affiliation.

One is likely to find less polarized debate when discussing issues such as prayer in school or the death penalty. Simply put, no one can seem to find any common ground on this important issue. Soda-maniacs and pop-aholics both are absolutely 100 percent sure that they are right.

Traditionally, soda drinkers tend to be from the Northeast or California. Meanwhile, those who use pop to quench their thirst have origins in the Midwest. A Web site dedicated to facilitating debate on this issue, titled “The Great Pop vs. Soda Controvery,” (www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~almccon/pop_soda/), seems to support this conclusion. However, much like Ross Perot in the 1992 Presidential election, a third party seems to be adding an unexpected wrinkle to the proceedings.

For them, coke is it. Labeling your soft drink “coke,” no matter if it is actually Coke or Pepsi or even a clear beverage such as Sprite, is a popular trend in the South and the lower portions of the Midwest. These people, who apparently have little respect for copyrighted trademarks, grabbed a suprising chunk of the soft drink electorate.

Out of a total of 16,303 votes from U.S. and Canadian residents, soda had 6,822 votes (41.9 percent), pop had 6,314 votes (38.7 percent) and Coke had 2,489 votes (15.3 percent). 678 voters (4.2 percent) chose other, with wide ranging responses including: tonic, drink, soda water, fizz, lollywater and cola. Many of the other voters compromised and used the term “soda-pop.”

Soda may have North America won over, but Ohio residents still like their pop. Pop crushed soda like a proverbial foot smashing a can, with an 82 to 12 percent victory.

So what does this all mean in the long run? We must all realize that no matter how much we like to call our soft drink what we call it, we must respect the diversity of beverage viewpoints. No matter if you like your soda or your pop, it’s all the same tasty beverage in the end.

Can’t we all just get along?

Jason Mann is the editor of The Lantern. He hopes all beverage viewpoints will be included in this great debate. Send hate mail or love letters to [email protected].