So what is there now, other than a deep sense of relief that the campaign season has come to an end? At least for a while, until things start to warm up for the March election in the city of Los Angeles.

We know much about what we can expect in the coming months – sales taxes will rise across L.A. County, businesses looking to cash in on the coming cannabis trade will continue to grow here, and development will, in most pockets, continue apace. The unknowns are writ much larger, and in many ways have greater implications.

At the end of a long, expensive, exhausting campaign, one can’t help but wonder if the length, cost, and tenor would suffer if we somehow managed to trim the process by several months. It is hard to argue that less shouting into the wind would do much harm. The Brits certainly are more efficient about it, and their democracy seems at least as stable and predictable as ours.

And yet there is some solace to be had in the wake of the event, particularly on the national scale. Uncertainty reigns – no matter where on the political spectrum one finds oneself, an untested leader is cause for concern – but also a gratifying (grudging?) willingness in most circles to give this experiment a chance.

There is a generosity in the process, an acknowledgement that the long line of transitions has been gracious, if not always comfortable.

And so we see in the comments from local business leaders the range of concerns that are raised across the country. (See page 10.) That trade policy is not an abstraction, that it has real implications – particularly in this, the home of the busiest and most important port complex in the nation. That more people need to be active in the process (another argument, perhaps, for making it briefer), that spending begets growth – whether it comes for the private sector or the public.

And that the nature of the process has a way to go to live up to our aspirations.