Trump Makes a Case for Law and Order at the R.N.C.

With the Republican National Convention concluded, the Trump Campaign’s message has become clear; Trump will bring law and order to a country that is riddled with crime and violence.

The convention was a departure from several norms of the past, including a stronger focus on the opposing candidate. The GOP stated they did not have a new platform, but rather that they continue to support the President’s platform from 2016. The convention was staged at the White House South Lawn and numerous speakers were White House staffers. Critics have said this convention has clearly violated the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act is an act that prevents civil service employees from engaging in political campaign activities with the exception of the President and Vice President. White House Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows responded to these criticisms with “Nobody outside of the Beltway really cares.”

Frankly, Meadows is right. Few voters actually care about the President using the White House as a staging ground for the convention. To the majority of Americans, the Hatch Act is completely meaningless.  What most people will actually see is an extravagant pageant with the President promising Americans that he will bring safety and security to their home.

Several speakers in the R.N.C. presented Trump as a keeper of peace. Vice President Mike Pence told viewers they “will not be safe in Joe Biden’s America”. The Vice President along with several other speakers emphasized to viewers that they “will always stand with those who stand on the thin blue line”. There were several claims that Joe Biden would defund the police, a claim that has been fact-checked as false and misleading by numerous sources already.

The final night of the convention presented a strong case for President Trump. Ann Marie Dorn, the widow of a retired St. Louis Police Captain David Dorn spoke at the R.N.C. about her husbands death, who was shot and killed during a violent protest in St. Louis, Missouri.  In a heartbreaking and powerful speech, Ann Dorn describes the horror of the night her husband died. “They shot and killed David in cold blood” she said, “and then livestreamed his execution and his last moments”. Compared to the rest of the speakers, Ann Dorn proved herself to be one of the most convincing speakers to sway voters for the incumbent president.

However, David Dorn’s daughters were against his widow speaking at the R.N.C. They have said Dorn was not a Trump supporter and would not have wanted his death to be used to help Trump.

Trump’s personal attorney and former New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani also spoke on night four of the R.N.C., delivering an aggressive speech making a case that Joe Biden is “a Trojan horse with Bernie, AOC, Pelosi, Black Lives Matter, and his party’s entire left wing just waiting to execute their pro-criminal, anti-police socialist policies.”

As the President took the stand and accepted the nomination, he unleashed a barrage of accusations and attacks on Joe Biden and Democrats. He called Biden “the destroyer of America’s greatness”. If Joe Biden were elected, Trump said “China would own our country”.

The President also repeated his common claim that he has “done more for the African-American community than any president since Abraham Lincoln.”

The convention showcased the GOP’s concern of losing its moderate white voters. Speakers at the convention were noticeably diverse. A large amount of those speakers were African Americans. Interestingly enough, it appeared the GOP was not interested in appealing to Hispanics and Asian Americans, who vote for them in higher numbers than African Americans. Instead, the GOP was attempting to reassure moderate white voters that they were voting for the right side and avoided trying to sway undecided Black voters to vote with them.

Trump continued his blaming of Democrats for the violence and crime in America.

“In the strongest possible terms, the Republican Party condemns the rioting, looting, arson, and violence we have seen in Democrat-run cities all, like Kenosha, Minneapolis, Portland, Chicago, and New York, and many others, Democrat-run,” Trump said, referring to protests that sparked over police brutality and racism in the United States.

Whether or not Trump’s message of law and order is working has yet to be clearly seen. The Morning Consult conducted two polls at the start and end of the R.N.C. Prior to the convention, Biden led Trump 52% to 42%. Following the convention, Trump narrowed the lead, reducing Biden’s advantage to four points, with Biden at 50% and Trump at 44%

The End of Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders

Senator Bernie Sanders officially ended his second campaign for the White House on the evening of April 8 after a long and somewhat successful run. For a short period, he was the Democratic frontrunner, but he fell short in acquiring the confidence and vote of the mainstream Democratic party as he did in the 2016 campaign. This makes former Vice President Joe Biden the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2020 presidential election. While the rest of the nation was focused on the coronavirus pandemic, as the only major candidate still in the race, Biden claimed major victories in the Florida, Arizona and Illinois primaries. 

Sanders can, however, claim an ideological victory. Over the course of two moderately successful presidential bids, he expanded the debate over universal healthcare and the disproportionate wealth gap in the United States. In a message to his supporters while announcing the end of his campaign he claimed that “Together we have transformed American consciousness as to what kind of nation we can become and have taken this country a major step forward in the never-ending struggle for economic justice, social justice, racial justice, and environmental justice.”

Early in the election cycle, Sanders seemed to be the perceived leader and frontrunner among the candidates. In the first three primary states – Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada – Sanders won bigger and bigger popular vote majorities and had the most delegates leaving these three contests. However, this frontrunner status was short-lived.  Biden surged in South Carolina, defeating Sanders by nearly 30 points, and other contenders, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out and endorsed the Vice President. This effectively left Sanders in the dust on Super Tuesday where Biden swept and carried a large, but not unsurpassable delegate victory.

Sanders’ biggest undoing in the late stages of the primary was the rapid mainstream consolidation around Biden after his rebound in South Carolina. Some would blame Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the other staunch progressive in the race who dropped out after Super Tuesday, but polling showed her votes were likely to split between Sanders and Biden regardless.

In some ways, however, Sanders did win the Democratic party’s attention. The public option is now a moderate position on healthcare, and Medicare-for-all is highly popular with Democratic voters and many sitting politicians. His focus on structural inequality and corporate influence is here to stay, especially among the young voters who were so fond of Sanders beginning in 2016.

Sanders can rest easy knowing that he successfully changed both public opinion and the Democratic insiders’ position on healthcare especially. He “wrote the damn bill” on Medicare-for-all, and now a resounding majority of Democratic voters say they support a national health insurance plan that covers everyone. His commitment to that position has pushed the rest of the party to the left.  The question for the left, now that the face of democratic socialism and this new wave of grassroots politics has fallen short of the presidency once again, is: what happens now? There are plenty of young voters who once said they were “Bernie or bust.” Will that remain the case? For the leaders of the Democratic party, they sure hope not if they want any chance to defeat incumbent President Donald Trump in November.

Soon after his announcement to end his bid for the presidency, Sanders went on to endorse Joe Biden for president. In his statement, he exclaimed that “Today, I am asking all Americans — I’m asking every Democrat; I’m asking every independent; I’m asking a lot of Republicans — to come together in this campaign to support [Biden’s] candidacy, which I endorse, to make certain that we defeat somebody who I believe is the most dangerous president in the modern history of this country.” Bernie Sanders made clear that regardless of the major differences between himself and Joe Biden, that in the end, he believes the most important thing to do is to elect a Democratic president and push Donald Trump out of the White House in 2020. This endorsement comes as somewhat of a surprise to many. In his 2016 campaign, he was reluctant to endorse the Democratic nominee, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she secured the nomination shortly before the national convention. This change is likely rooted in the backlash he received following the 2016 election. His endorsement of Biden is important to many as it is a push for those who refused to support the democratic nominee in 2016 unless it was Sanders to move to a reconciled party to defeat Donald Trump.

This week we may have seen the end for Bernie Sanders, the presidential candidate, but it may not yet be the end of his national political movement that has caused a massive following and an even larger generation of political activists.

No Labels: Problem Solver Convention

MANCHESTER – On Sunday, November 3, individuals from across the country gathered at the DoubleTree in Manchester for the No Labels: Problem Solver Convention. No Labels, a political organization whose mission is to combat partisan dysfunction in Congress, hosted the event that headlined multiple presidential candidates, members of the Congressional Problem Solvers Caucus, as well as current and former senators. 

Former Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) spoke early on in the program regarding the importance of the ideals and attitudes of No Labels. He discussed the widening partisan divide in the U.S. Congress, and how in many ways “it seems like the extremes are driving the train and the rest of us are along for the ride”. Lieberman warned of the dangers of polarization, anger, and resentment of those we disagree with. He argued that the growing number of registered independents, the problem-solvers, represented the new silent majority. Lieberman said, “America needs a little rebellion now [sic] a nonpartisan rebellion”.

Inspired by the ideals Senator Lieberman described, the Congressional Problem Solvers Caucus began its work 10 years ago in the House of Representatives looking for bipartisan solutions where they can be found in order to break the gridlock. The Caucus is comprised of 24 Democratic members and 24 Republican members, and it is currently co-chaired by Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Tom Reed (R-NY). Members of the caucus were present at the convention and held a panel where they discussed their work in Congress coming to bipartisan solutions. In addition to Gottheimer and Reed, the panel included: U.S. Representatives Max Rose (D-NY); Tom Suozzi (D-NY); Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA); Dan Meuser (R-PA); Xochitl Torres Small (D-NM); and Steve Watkins (R-KS).

No Labels’ Get In The Room Campaign is centered around encouraging congressional leaders to “get in the room” through constituent letters, calls, and emails in order to negotiate solutions for contentious issues. Convention organizers encouraged attendees to participate in the campaign in order to accomplish the goals of the organization.

Much of the convention was punctuated by a growing generational divide. The vast majority of the crowd was at or close to the retirement age, and such a difference was apparent. The older attendees, which comprised the majority of the audience, raised concerns about social security, partisan divide, term limits, and campaign finance reform; however, there was little mention of issues like wealth inequality and education reform.

A Connecticut resident, aged 28, mentioned that the exuberant cost of living in states like Connecticut meant that he was without much hope that he would ever own a home. This showed that younger generations focus on distinctly different issues from older generations. In fact, when one voter, aged 84, expressed a desire to make community colleges free in order to bring down the rising cost of education, another retirement-aged audience member cried out, asking how that could be done when pensions and the social security net was in jeopardy.

Increasing the political activism of younger generations was mentioned by Former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, who is currently challenging President Trump for the Republican nomination. He outlined a plan to increase the younger vote by making it possible to vote on your phone, where the voter would take a picture of themselves to verify their identity then email their vote to a government database. He made no mention of potential security and privacy issues that would come with this. Weld also suggested that Climate Change could be addressed by simply instituting a tax on carbon emissions of various corporations and businesses, but he offered little else on that front. To a younger audience member, both ideas seemed like yet another example of a 20th-century solution for 21st-century problems.

In addition to Weld, there were also three contenders for the Democratic Presidential Nomination present at the event: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI); Congressman John Delany (D-MD); and author and activist Marianne Williamson. Gabbard was the first candidate to speak, and she also came into the audience to conduct an audience question and answer session. At one point she said that a president should focus on “not serving the needs of one party over another, but actually serving the needs of the American people”. Delaney echoed this sentiment, quoting President John F. Kennedy as saying, “let us not seek the Democratic answer, or the Republican answer, but the right answer.” Williamson called on the “people to step in” and reclaim their government. She also called for a “World War 2 sized mobilization” to address the threat of climate change.

Near the end of the convention, the organizers conducted a straw poll, asking voters “If you had to vote today, who would you vote for?” The end tally of the near 1500 audience members resulted in a “victory” for South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 18.5% of the vote, followed by Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) with 17.5% and former Maryland Rep. John Delaney with 14.2%. The three current leaders in national polling for the Democratic nomination, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders each received 6.9%, 5%, and 3.6% of the vote, respectively. The divergence from the national polling results could be due to the presence of supporters of the candidates speaking at the event, as well as the similar ideals of bipartisanship and cooperation amongst participants.

* This article was written collaboratively by Editor In Chief Jackson Peck and Administrative Correspondent Aidan Pierce. Edited in part by Off-Campus News Coordinator Bryan Lavoie.

Special thanks to Chloe Cincotta, Madison Mangels, and the rest of New Hampshire No Labels for inviting the Hilltopper to this convention and providing us with press access.

Meet The Candidates: Stefan Zwolinski ’23, President

Stefan Zwolinski is a confident candidate for President of the Class of 2023. Stefan, who has formed his campaign around active communication and selfless leadership, said in his interview with the Hilltopper: “Actions speak louder than words. Acting on what we as candidates say is the most important thing, and it’s up to the voters to determine who does that best.” 

When asked about his qualifications for the position, Stefan pointed to his past experiences in high school student government. He remarked that it had not always been easy, and at times during his junior and senior year he had been required to work within a team which had inefficiencies and it forced him to take on more responsibilities. On how he views the Presidency, Stefan said: “It’s a challenge for me, and it’s something I challenge myself to do […] this is something I’ve come to be passionate about”. Stefan would go on to emphasize the passion and the need for passionate leaders. 

Photo courtesy of Stefan Zwolinksi

This passion could be seen in his goals for the year: building and strengthening personal relationships with his constituents, opening consistent pathways of communication, and maintaining a strong work ethic as a group. He said that as a council “We’re not going to stop working no matter what”, and that he wants “everyone to have their voice in determining their future”. 

If you had the opportunity to see Stefan’s speech Wednesday night, it should be no surprise that he is a strong supporter of the Saint Anselm athletic community. He remarked that he’d had multiple conversations with students who had wanted to create more club sports on campus, as well as increasing funding and support for those clubs. One example he highlighted, was an instance in which the Club Soccer team had been denied their request for SGA to fund their transportation to and from their games. 

Stefan also pointed out the need for more effective methods of communication from his class. He suggested appointing a Communications Manager, as social media was a viable means of communication and something everyone has access to. When asked specifically about the turnout at the candidates’ speeches Wednesday night, Stefan said: “We’re all to blame for not telling people about speeches”. He elaborated on that statement by saying that it was partially SGA’s responsibility and fault for poorly advertising the event, but part of the issue falls back on the Freshmen candidates themselves for not encouraging more people to attend the event. He said clearly: “I think they could’ve done a better job, but if we want our voices to get heard it’s our responsibility”.

On the topic of fundraising and event planning, Stefan said that he was going to be looking towards Student Body President Joshua Hughes, and other seasoned SGA veterans for advice and guidance. However, Stefan argued that though the role of the President was to lead class activities, it wouldn’t stop him from supporting his peers in the Senate and advocating for issues he was passionate about. He said, “being President isn’t just about fundraising and events” and that he hoped to go above and beyond the typical model of Class President. 

Stefan is one of two candidates for the position of President of the Class of 2023. Voting will be held Monday and Tuesday in Davison and CShop.

Meet The Candidates: Emily Dickey ’23, President

Emily Dickey is one of two candidates running to be the President for the Class of 2023. In her campaign speech, which she delivered Wednesday, Emily spoke briefly about the common emotions freshmen have when coming to college. She discussed the feelings of worry, sadness, and uncertainty that accompanied her on her way to Saint Anselm, but she pointed out that those feelings did not last long. She said simply, “I have found a new family here” and that she was “thrilled with the choice to become an Anselmian”. She went on to say that “There’s a strength here, and people just want to progress and grow and help others” and that she’s “never met a group of people so committed to being better individuals every day”.

When asked about her goals for the year, Emily highlighted the obvious need to engage with students and increase student participation. One of her main goals is to learn more about Saint Anselm and SGA in what she called “the trial and error year”. She explained that as freshmen she and her peers have a great deal to learn, but they are also afforded a host of new and exciting opportunities.

Photo courtesy of Emily Dickey

Emily spoke about the unique perspective she was hoping to bring to her class council by bringing up her favorite quote: “Move the needle”. She said that she always kept this in mind as she was a leader in student government all throughout high school. Now, in college, she is hoping to bring that same attitude not simply to move her needle, but to “do things that’ll help other people move their needle in life”. 

On the subject of student engagement, Emily said that there were multiple factors behind the apparent lack of interest among her peers. The first, she said, was that people simply didn’t know enough about the school yet to take a major stake in it and work towards solving issues around campus. Secondly, she mentioned that it was SGA’s job to “get the kids out there”; she was referencing the traditional formatting of SGA candidate speeches being held in an auditorium, only available to those willing to come and watch. Emily suggested that it would be possible to stream speeches to multiple areas around campus – Davison, CShop, and the Student Center. She mentioned that the current format made her, and her fellow candidates, feel hidden and secluded. The solution to the issue of low student turnout, in Emily’s mind, is utilizing the power of word of mouth and directly asking students to participate. As she mentioned in her speech and reiterated in her interview, Emily believes the best way to engage with students is to identify an active core group of students that can motivate their peers and bring students to events.

Emily is one of two candidates for the position of President of the Class of 2023. Voting will be held Monday and Tuesday in Davison and CShop.

Moderates and Progressives Separate Themselves in the Third Democratic Debate

The third Democratic Presidential Debate came, went, and left many faced with uncertainty on the political battlefield. The first party-sanctioned event to have only one night of debates saw ten candidates battle for their messages to be heard, and a possible soundbite or two to make it to the Twitter-sphere following the event. However, little happened that was “expected”, which arguably led to the most interesting debate yet.

The lesser-known candidates proved themselves exceptionally well with multiple high profile interactions that are sure to put ink to parchment for the Saturday paper. Julián Castro, HUD Secretary under the Obama Administration, took multiple stabs at frontrunner Joe Biden. First, when Biden was speaking about medicare and whether it should be a buy-in option or automatic, he seemed to consistently go back on his word. Castro saw a flaw in Biden’s statement and asked the former Vice President if he “forget what [he] said two minutes ago?” Castro, not finished with his attempted bash at Biden, pointed out the hypocritical nature of Biden’s references to his work under former President Barack Obama. In an attempt to attach himself to Obama, he claims he was a large part of “that administration”. However, he eventually did go back and say he acted solely as the Vice-President and had no say on certain issues.

Entrepreneur Andrew Yang, an outsider candidate who tailors well towards millennials and internet culture, was much more prominent in this debate than any prior. He managed to join in the conversation (amounting to only a few minutes throughout the debate), each time seeing much applause from the audience. At this event, he announced that he would be running a contest to prove the value of his “Freedom Dividend”, Yang’s take on a Universal Basic Income. He claimed that 10 campaign donors who donate in the coming days will be chosen to receive $1,000 every month until the election. This truly riled up the crowd and got the newsrooms buzzing.

Some other interesting comments also took place in this rowdy arena. Booker, when commenting on foreign affairs, noted that he found Justin Trudeau’s hair intimidating. Pete Buttigieg, the Mayor from Indiana, took a stronger anti-war stance on Afghanistan and made a campaign promise to require congressional approval for all military action. Harris made a soundbite for the century, asserting that “Trump’s been tweeting out ammunition.” As no debate is free of them, a group of protesters interrupted Biden during his closing statement.

Mitchell Young (2023), when asked what his initial thoughts about the debate were, said that there is a “clear divide between the left and more moderate democrats”. Continuing on the party cleavage, he noted that “Booker and Castro did a much better job”. While both candidates are not “top tier” candidates, both gained valuable air time. Again, while managing to show himself to the cameras, Young brought bad press with his attacks against Biden.

Christopher Demarkey (2023) expressed similar points declaring that “Booker, Castro, and Biden had [sic] great nights”. This can be further extrapolated when examining the first round of mudslinging with healthcare where the “radical left got called out on healthcare”, and that “Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were ganged up against”. Biden and Sanders were seen at multiple points during the healthcare question outright yelling at each other on live TV, with Biden claiming Sander’s plan for Medicare For All is not economically sound.

The debate, while over, will see hours upon hours of continuous usage until the next. Until then, the soundbites of the candidates will haunt them, or greet them, as each one of them turns on the news to see their poll numbers on the rise, or on the decline. The October Debate, scheduled for the 15th and 16th in Ohio, will see the same debate requirements as that for September.