The Dartmouth 02/12/2020

VOL. CLXXVI NO. 134

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2020

HANOVER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Sanders wins NH primary

Buttigieg wins Hanover, followed closely by Sanders and Klobuchar

ELSA ERICKSEN/THE DARTMOUTH STAFF

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) won the New Hampshire Democratic primary, the Associated Press projects as of press time. He was followed by former South Bend, IN mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

HANOVER RESULTS

Buttigieg closely follows Sanders, with Klobuchar surging to third

B y ALEX FREDMAN

The Dartmouth Senior Staff

News Analysis

BUTTIGIEG: 25.9%

SANDERS: 19.9%

KLOBUCHAR: 19.7%

WARREN: 18.0%

OPINION

MAGANN: #NEVERBERNIE PAGE 3

HILL-WELD: STOP SAYING BERNIE CAN’T WIN PAGE 3

ARTS

REVIEW: ‘ONE CHILD NATION’ LOOKS AT CHINESE POLICY IN SCATTERED WAY PAGE 4

MOSTLY SUNNY HIGH 37 LOW 28

FOLLOW US ON

TWITTER

@thedartmouth

COPYRIGHT © 2020 THE DARTMOUTH, INC.

Bernie Sanders’ victory in yesterday’s New Hampshire primary, paired with his toptwo finish in the Iowa caucuses last week, is a strong sign that he is the frontrunner to win the Democratic nomination.

Unless, of course, you take into account that Iowa and New Hampshire — states with small populations that are over 90-percent white — are not nearly representative of the Democratic electorate, which is built on a coalition of people of color and voters from large metropolitan areas.

Unless you take into account that most voters in upcoming primaries will make their decisions with little thought given to last night’s outcome.

Unless you believe that the early primaries and caucuses arguably get more attention than they deserve.

Unless you believe the fact that, according to a CNN exit

poll, just under half of New Hampshire voters made up their minds within the last few days — which shows just how much the state of the Democratic race is still in flux.

Well, you get the point.

This is not to take away from the fact that yesterday’s outcome is very good news for Sanders. The Vermont senator clearly has a strong base of support which will come out for him in upcoming primaries and caucuses. And while early results mean little in terms of delegate allocation at the convention, they do have real and significant implications in terms of campaign fundraising, news cycles and that mysterious yet ubiquitous force called “momentum.” Undoubtedly, Sanders will get good marks on all of these fronts.

But Pete Buttigieg, replicating a good night in Iowa, also had a strong finish in New Hampshire.

He has done well with a broad swath of voters, particularly in rural areas, and will likely be a contender in this nomination fight for a while to come.

However, in arguably the most consequential and surprising news of the evening, Amy Klobuchar had a very good night, pulling in a close third place. The Minnesota senator was rising fast in the polls in New Hampshire over the last few days and has proven herself, with a strong finish in the primary, to be a serious contender in this race.

Meanwhile, in Hanover, Buttigieg came away the winner, pulling in 26 percent of the vote.

He was followed by Sanders and Klobuchar with roughly 20 percent each and Elizabeth Warren with 18 percent.

But Hanover is not quite the Sanders stronghold one would expect from a college town.

Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton here in the 2016 presidential primary 53 to 46.5 percent despite taking the state overall by a 22-point margin. And a poll conducted by The Dartmouth this past weekend found that Sanders and Buttigieg received roughly equal levels of support among students voting in the New Hampshire primary.

Hanover, in recent general SEE NEWS ANALYSIS PAGE 2

Hanover High sees busy day at polls, significant same-day registration B y LAUREN ADLER

The Dartmouth Staff

With the polls open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. yesterday, around 400 voters an hour cast their ballots in Hanover High School’s gymnasium for the New Hampshire presidential primaries. Voters — many of whom made their decision just this week or even yesterday — indicated broad preferences for former South Bend, IN mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

Hanover registered 1,015 voters at the polls yesterday under New Hampshire’s sameday voter registration policy, according to checklist supervisor Elaine Hawthorne. Hanover town clerk Betsy McClain said she was surprised by the number of people who registered to vote at the polls yesterday.

“I wasn’t even thinking we really had to schedule more than one person at the same-day registration table, but a lot of

younger people got up early and came in,” McClain said.

Many voters said that they made their decisions close to the primary, with some ultimately picking their candidates on election day.

“I think that [Warren] would make the best president, and what I decided just now is I can’t try to predict how other people are going to vote and who’s going to win an election,” said Joanne Hayes, who decided to vote for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) when she arrived at the polls. “I just voted for the person who’s going to be the best president.”

Electability was a common theme among voters, many of whom said they picked their candidate because they believed they could beat President Donald Trump in the general election.

“I’ve been keeping up with the polls, and I think that [Sanders] has a great chance to beat Donald Trump, and that’s my main concern for this 2020 election,” said Diego Perez ’23, who decided yesterday to vote for

Sanders. “After the Iowa caucus, everything was pretty much looking towards Bernie, and even though Pete Buttigieg actually won, Bernie Sanders did get the popular vote in SEE POLLS PAGE 2

B y THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF After months of town halls, rallies and stump speeches, the 2020 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary ended with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) claiming the top spot with 25.7 percent of the votes, the Associated Press projects as of press time.

South Bend, IN mayor Pete Buttegieg narrowly followed with 24.4 percent of the vote, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (DMN) garnered 19.7 percent of the vote to make a comeback third-place win.

“Let me say tonight that this victory here is the beginning of the end for Donald Trump,” Sanders said to a crowd of supporters in Manchester.

Buttegieg — who narrowly edged out Sanders in the Iowa Caucuses — grabbed a second place finish despite heavy attacks on his moderate stances and lack of experience.

“Here in a state that goes by the motto, Live Free or Die, you made up your own minds,” Buttigieg said in a speech to his supporters in Nashua. “You asserted that famous independent streak, and thanks to you, a campaign that some said shouldn’t be here at all has shown that we are here to stay.”

In Hanover, Buttigieg took the top spot with 25.9 percent of the votes. Sanders and Klobuchar came in a close second and third with 19.9 and 19.7 percent, respectively.

Warren was just behind with 18 percent, and Biden came far behind in fourth place with 7.2 percent.

With a surge of late support, Klobuchar took third in the

state, edging out former frontrunners Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and for mer vice president Joe Biden.

This surprising finish has given a shot of adrenaline to her small campaign, which has already announced staff expansions in upcoming states.

“Because of you, we are taking this campaign to Nevada,” Klobuchar said in an address to her supporters in Concord. “We are going to South Carolina. And we are taking this message of unity to the country.”

Despite a strong polling over the last few months and neighboring New Hampshire, Wa r re n c a m e i n fo u r t h , garnering only 9.3 percent of voters. She still edged out Biden, who came in fifth with 8.4 percent of voters. Neither Biden nor Warren leave New Hampshire with delegates for this summer’s convention.

In a speech to supporters, Warren called for party unity and congratulated Klobuchar for her strong finish.

“I also want to congratulate my friend and colleague Amy Klobuchar for showing just how wrong the pundits can be when they count a woman out,” she said to a crowd of supporters.

Biden foreshadowed the subpar finish by not only predicting a poor outcome o n Fr i d a y ’s D e m o c r a t i c presidential debate but also leaving the state for South Carolina early yesterday.

Speaking in South Carolina, Biden criticized New Hampshire and Iowa for not being representative of the general population, SEE RESULTS PAGE 2

WILLIAM CHEN/THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF

Pete Buttigieg won Hanover yesterday.

PAGE 2

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2020

THE DARTMOUTH NEWS

Scenes from a watch party: Results trickle in slowly, but surely B y EILEEN BRADY

The Dartmouth Staff

Around 90 students packed the Collis Center’s TV lounge on Tuesday night to watch the results of the New Hampshire primary unfold. TVs around the room featured live coverage from CNN, MSNBC and the local WMUR9, while ABC’s Devin Dwyer ’05 broadcasted from the event throughout the evening.

The event, titled “Rocky’s MostWatched Watch Party,” was hosted by the Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and Collis Governing Board and included remarks from vice president for communications Justin Anderson. After students gathered to watch analysis of the polls closing at 7 p.m., Anderson began his remarks in a presentation titled, “Hope and Change: the Evolution of Political News Coverage since 2000.” Speaking about his personal experience as a reporter on the campaign trail in 2000, an ABC News producer and a media relations specialist at the College, Anderson discussed the recent evolution of media coverage of elections and campaigns, specifically entailing the movement away from multi-candidate, policy-oriented events at the College such as national debates.

Once the introductory remarks concluded around 8 p.m., a cheerful murmur broke out in the crowd, as attendees discussed who they voted for earlier in the day. Gradually, attention turned to the incoming results, which first showed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) leading former South Bend, IN mayor Pete Buttigieg 27.7 percent to 22.8 percent with nine percent of precincts reporting.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) trailed behind with 20.3 percent, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) rounded out

the top four with 12.3 percent.

With so few precincts reporting, however, Kellen Love ’21 expressed hope that third place might still be within reach for Warren — his preferred candidate.

He said he chose to vote for her because, while there are a number of candidates he could see himself supporting, he thought Warren deserved more support.

“I think voting in New Hampshire gives you the opportunity to kind of push a candidate one way or the other, potentially, and I just saw her kind of lagging in a way that I’m not so sure she should be,” Love said. “Realistically, I think third place is very viable.”

Love said that he was excited to see how the night played out and noted that, regardless of who wins New Hampshire and who ends up the eventual Democratic Party nominee for president, he will cast a blue ballot come November.

Shortly after the influx of initial results, news broke that entreprenuer Andrew Yang would be suspending his campaign, a development that had little visible impact on the crowd. Arnold Fuentes ’23, a Sanders supporter, said that he was slightly disappointed to hear of Yang’s withdrawal.

“I thought that he would at least wait until Nevada or South Carolina,” Fuentes said. “I’m kind of sad that he’s dropping out because it means that [the race] is becoming less diverse, but at the same time I want the number of candidates to get smaller so that we don’t have a split contest in June.”

Fuentes noted that while he did not vote in the New Hampshire primary, he looks forward to casting his absentee vote for Sanders in Florida’s primary on March 17. He said he felt that his vote would “be more important” in Florida come the November general election, adding that

LORRAINE LIU/THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF

Dartmouth vice president for communications Justin Anderson spoke before a watch party at Collis last night.

he felt sure that Sanders would still be involved in the race by the time primary day came around in his home state.

By 9:15 p.m., Fuentes was feeling better than ever, as Sanders held onto his 4.3-percent lead over Buttigieg.

“I was pretty confident that [Sanders] would outperform [the other candidates] tonight,” he said. “I knew that [Buttigieg] would give him a real fight, but I feel like he’s going to come out of it really strong.”

As the results continued to solidify, some attention was turned to Klobuchar, who exceeded expectations and held onto third place throughout the night. Sarah Solomon ’21, who said she voted for Buttigieg but supports Klobuchar, noted that she may have voted for the senator had she known how well she would perform.

“I actually voted for Buttigieg because I thought he would be the best candidate to beat Sanders,” Solomon said. “I am a [Klobuchar] supporter in that if I were voting sincerely I would have voted for her, but strategically I voted for Buttigieg.”

Solomon added that she was excited to see Klobuchar performing well and thinks she would make a great nominee, especially considering the ever-important “electability” factor. She noted that she believes Klobuchar would perform better than both Sanders and Buttigieg in a general election due to Sanders being “too far left” and Buttigieg lacking experience.

Additionally, she noted that she believes the country may unfortunately be more “ready” to elect a woman than a gay man.

By 9:30, with over 50 percent of precincts reporting, the crowd in the Collis

TV room had thinned. With Sanders leading, and over 60 percent of precincts reporting, Sade Akinfe ’20said that she was really excited about his performance and expressed hope that he would be able to ride this momentum all the way into the White House, where she believes he will do his best to enact his campaign promises.

“I believe in Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, making public colleges free and cancelling student loan debt, and I just really think he’s going to stick to his word once he gets into office,” Akinfe said. “I’m hoping to celebrate after this and end the day on a great note.”

As the room began to empty out, and the results coalesced, few students were able to witness the final results of the evening from the watch party — instead learning the news on their own.

Bad night for Biden, Yang, Bennet drop out with poor results Warren, questions remain FROM RESULTS PAGE 1

FROM NEWS ANALYSIS PAGE 1

elections, has consistently provided the highest margin of victory to Democratic candidates of any town in the state. As an article in yesterday’s issue of The Dartmouth pointed out, Hanover has historically been carried in Democratic primaries by more liberal candidates, such as Barack Obama in 2008, Howard Dean in 2004, Bill Bradley in 2000 and Paul Tsongas in 1992. But this time around, with other college towns around the state giving victories to Sanders, Hanover went decidedly to the more moderate Buttigieg.

The candidates with the worst nights were Warren and Joe Biden. Warren, despite enjoying name recognition as a senator from a neighboring state, ended up winning only about 9 percent of the vote — well behind the top three finishers.

This is no doubt a disappointing finish for someone who through 2019 boasted strong fundraising and an extensive campaign apparatus.

Likewise, Biden had an undoubtedly bad night, which he apparently foresaw when he left the state yesterday afternoon for South Carolina. Biden has built his campaign around electability and being the presumed Democratic frontrunner, and it is becoming clear that this might

not be the case. A CNN exit poll found that the only significant voting bloc that Biden led in New Hampshire were voters over 65.

When Dick Tuck, the notorious Democratic prankster extraordinaire, ran for a California Senate seat in 1966, he realized as the night grew long that the election was not going his way. “Just wait till the dead vote comes in,” he quipped.

Perhaps Biden is thinking the same thing now.

Biden’s base throughout this primary has been black voters, and polls have shown him leading in the early primary state of South Carolina — as well as other states with Democratic electorates that have larger proportions of black voters.

So, the question remains: Will the dynamics of this race change significantly when the decidedly more diverse voters in Nevada and South Carolina cast their votes in the coming weeks?

Will Sanders and Buttigieg — not to mention Klobuchar — be able to turn strong finishes in New Hampshire into continued success in upcoming primaries?

Will moderate voters bolt from Biden, and will they back Bloomberg?

Only time will yield the answers to these questions — and so, all we can do is sit back and see how it happens.

particularly given its lack of black and Latino voters.

“It ain’t over folks — it’s just getting started,” Biden said to the crowd of his supporters.

Entrepreneur Andrew Yang and Sen. Micheal Bennet (D-CO) both dropped out around 8 p.m., making early news while primary results tricked in. Despite suspending their campaigns, Yang and Bennet

garnered 2.8 and 0.3 percent in the state, respectively.

In neighboring Lebanon, Sanders won by a mere three votes over Buttegieg. Warren and Klobuchar followed in third and fourth. In Lyme, Buttegieg beat Klobuchar by only one vote, with Sanders and Warren following.

In the 2016 Democratic primary election, Sanders beat for mer Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by a large margin of over 22 percent,

although his margin of victory was smaller in Hanover.

On the other side of the aisle, President Donald Trump handedly won the Republican primary with 85.5 percent of the vote. Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, the only remaining Republican challenging the president, pulled in more than 9 percent of the vote. In Hanover, Weld pulled in 30.5 percent of the vote, with Trump winning just 50.4 percent.

THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS

Voters made choices based on values, electability FROM POLLS PAGE 1

Iowa. And to me that’s more important — like that’s more representative overall.”

While Perez made his decision based solely on Sanders’ electability, other voters chose their candidates by looking at which policies best aligned with their individual values much earlier.

New Hampshire state Rep. Martha Hennessey ’76 (D-Hanover), who publicly endorsed Buttigieg after Sen. Corey Booker (D-NJ) dropped out of the race, said she made her decision well before the election.

“He’s always listening to other people, and willing to adapt his own ideas based on surrounding himself by very bright, well-studied people,” Hennessey said. “He doesn’t get flapped so I think he could handle Trump — he doesn’t get excited, he doesn’t call people names, and I think we’ve seen a little bit too much of that … and he knows why he’s there and what he’s about.”

Hanover also saw a high number of write-in votes.

Paula Schnurr, who ultimately decided on Election Day to vote for Klobuchar, said she came close to writing in former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.

“I think [Bloomberg] is also an excellent choice, and will likely be a factor

in the race, but I thought for now that [Klobuchar] probably looked the most promising, and I would be very glad to have her as a president,” she said.

While entrepreneur Andrew Yang dropped out of the race early yesterday evening, students not only voiced support for the candidate, but also voted for him.

“I wasn’t really drawn to any of the other ones besides Yang,” said Alex Jones ’23, who voted for Yang after listening to his speech in Hanover on Sunday. “I was really drawn to his idea of a universal basic income. I like the way he frames the issues in this country, and I think he has succinct, but well thought-out solutions to what he thinks are the main problems in this country today.”

Regardlessof whowinstheDemocratic presidential nomination, Hennessey said she hopes that Democrats will be able to come together behind the party’s pick.

“I think the number one thing is I would like people to stop sniping at each other,” she said. “They talk the talk about how we’re all going to have to stick together in the end and support [whomever] is the nominee, but I’m terrified that they’re not going to walk the walk … I think we all need to have that same attitude and just really concentrate on our candidate, and on the issues, and on winning — and not concentrating on beating each other up to get there.”

JULIA LEVINE/THE DARTMOUTH

Hanover High School bustled with activity as voters arrived to cast their ballots.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2020

PAGE 3

THE DARTMOUTH OPINION

OPINION EDITOR MATTHEW MAGANN ’21

OPINION EDITOR TEDDY HILL-WELD ’20

#NeverBernie

Stop Saying Bernie Can’t Win

If the polls are any indication, Bernie 2016 chaos: the candidate at the extreme.

Sanders is surging. He lost the Iowa caucuses Democrats have a choice to make. We by a razor-thin margin against Pete Buttigieg can remain divided and inevitably nominate and did very well in New Hampshire.

Sanders, an unpopular candidate with little Just a few years ago, Sanders was a relative chance of success against Trump. Spin whatever nobody. He was a political outsider — he passed fiction you will about how Sanders is somehow very little significant legislation, and his role was electable — if you want the facts, look at the mostly confined to an ideologue castigating the British Labour Party’s recent disastrous electoral Democratic Party as “ideologically bankrupt” defeat, a defeat many attribute to the party’s while Democratic legislators bypassed him and nomination of the far-left Jeremy Corbyn as took real, actionable steps to improve the lives leader. Corbyn sparked all sorts of enthusiasm of Americans. and came out with the same bold claims as But then came 2016. Sanders ran an insurgent Sanders of rallying non-voters into supporting campaign against that most establishment of him — only for Labour to suffer its worst defeat establishment candidates, in over 80 years.

Hillary Clinton. And So Democrats, let’s “There was a lot to granted, there was a lot not repeat the same mistake like about Sanders. to like about Sanders. He that the Republicans made He presented a presented a message of in 2016. The GOP failed progress and change, which, message of progress to stop an extremist who to many Americans fed up barged into the party from and change, which, to the outside — and now that with the status quo, had a clear appeal. many Americans fed extremist has seized control But don’t forget what the party. The party of up with the status quo, of Sanders did once it became John McCain and George had a clear appeal.” clear that Clinton would H.W. Bush now sells T-shirts secure the nomination. showing Greenland as the He stayed in the race and 51st state, a reference to continued to criticize the presumptive nominee, Trump’s ham-fisted attempt to buy the Arctic to the benefit of no one but Donald Trump. nation from Denmark.

Even once Sanders endorsed Clinton, In the wake of Trump, the GOP has become a faction of his diehard supporters started a cheap parody of itself. Republicans might have the “Bernie or Bust” movement and refused been able to stop Trump during the primary, to vote for Clinton in the general election. but they became bogged down in internecine In Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, battles and division as Trump rode the wave to Trump’s margin of victory was smaller than victory. the number of Sanders’ primary voters who Let’s allow the next two weeks to play refused to back Clinton in the general election. out. New Hampshire and Iowa are hardly And if those three states had gone Democratic, representative demographically, and other Clinton would have won the election. states won’t experience the same intensity And now in 2020, Sanders is back. He’s of campaigning that we have here. But once a popular choice at Dartmouth — in a pre- Nevada and South Carolina have voted, it’s election poll by The Dartmouth, he maintained time for Democrats to take stock. a statistical tie for first with Buttigieg among Perhaps Buttigieg will ride the momentum students voting in the New Hampshire from Iowa and New Hampshire, or Klobuchar Democratic primary. will rise in the polls after her promising Nationally, Sanders isn’t very popular. His performance in the Granite State. There’s core group of partisans back him vehemently, always the possibility that Warren will capture but he still averages at just 23 percent support the left-leaning voters who aren’t comfortable in the Democratic primary. He proudly and with Sanders’ lack of pragmatism. And don’t frequently proclaims himself a “democratic count Biden out — he’s still polling well ahead in socialist” — an interesting strategy, given that a South Carolina, and he has decades of political Tuesday Gallup poll showed that 53 percent of experience.

Americans would refuse to Yes, there are vote for their party nominee differences between these “What our country who was a “generally candidates. But before well-qualified person for needs isn’t ideological Super Tuesday, it’s time president who happened for the Democrats to pick purity. What our to be socialist.” Sanders’ one. Hopefully, the votes in country needs is real, Nevada and South Carolina use of the “socialist” label presumably gives him some concrete change that make that choice an obvious cache among those who one, but even if not, it’s matters to everyday style themselves radicals imperative that Democratic — and let’s leave out that voters throw their weight Americans.” fact that he’s quite clearly behind one candidate. a social democrat, not a Otherwise, we’ll let our socialist — but for most Americans, the term marginal differences divide us as Sanders — who “socialism” is electoral poison. Sanders has isn’t a Democrat at all — uses the primaries to always sat on one extreme of American politics, seize control for his own minority faction. We’ll and he isn’t especially popular, even among then have a 2020 race between two demagogues Democrats. on the extremes, and with only one guaranteed So why then is Sanders the current loser: all of us. Sanders may be preferable to Democratic frontrunner? The answer seems to Trump, but a vote for either is a vote for four lie — as it did with Trump in 2016 — with the more years of division, turmoil, populism and fractured nature of the rest of the field. The resentment.

Democrats have Joe Biden, Buttigieg and Amy What our country needs isn’t ideological Klobuchar all running within spitting distance purity. What our country needs is real, concrete of one another as mainline liberals. Add to change that matters to everyday Americans. that Elizabeth Warren with her progressive There are many promising Democratic campaign and Michael Bloomberg with his candidates who offer just that. If we want to wealth-fueled attempt to supplant Biden and end the partisanship and division that so often you’ve got a crowded, fractured field. And characterize our politics, it’s our duty to put there’s only one victor from that division, just aside our personal favorites and unite behind as there was only one victor from the GOP’s a candidate who can win.

If the New Hampshire election results hold at the campaign raised $95 million in 2019. In the time I’m writing this column, this newspaper December alone, 900,000 individuals donated will likely be announcing a victory for Vermont to Sanders, and in the first month of 2020, Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic the campaign raised another $25 million. primary — or at least a very good finish.

Meanwhile, the Biden campaign has raised With what has been described as a functional 64 percent of its funds from large donations, home-state advantage, Sanders won the 2016 Buttigieg is at 55 percent and Elizabeth Warren New Hampshire primary is the only candidate within against Hillary Clinton distance of Bernie’s “People were excited spitting by a whopping 22 points.

55 percent small-donation

by Sanders in a way His closest competitor in mark. The reason why the the polls here this year is Sanders campaign has that Clinton just former South Bend, IN had so much success is not couldn’t compete mayor Pete Buttigieg, who because the Twitterverse is benefitting from unease o f B e r n i e B ro s a n d with.” in the moderate segment of hyperactive primary voters the party after former vice skew the numbers, despite president Joe Biden’s weak showing in the Iowa what many in the media and Washington caucuses. Biden is still polling just two points intelligentsia might say. Sanders is in the lead behind Sanders nationally, but New Hampshire because his message is stronger than any of his and Iowa have clearly demonstrated that competitors, and it speaks to a greater portion moderate voters are far more inclined to vote of the electorate. strategically and switch their vote in order to The Sanders message isn’t about eliminating get a candidate that they agree with in office. polarization; it’s about understanding where it But are these self-proclaimed pragmatists really originates. The Bidens and Buttigiegs of the playing the game with a winning strategy? world are more than ready to believe that once Moderate Democrats have been quick to we get Trump out of office, we can get things point to the results of last year’s U.K. general back to normal and everything will be okay. If election — where the Labour Party was the Big Nasty™ is gone, all the sexism and white trounced by the Conservative Party by more supremacy and climate denial will all go away than 150 seats in Parliament — as proof that a and we can focus on the real problems: climate moderate candidate has the only path to victory change and automation and North Korea. But against President Trump.

Donald Trump was not But the results of the 2016 the cause of the political “The real reason presidential election paint divisiveness we witness a different picture, and today, and neither was the we experience one that centrists should Tea Party movement that polarization today is emerged in the Obama pay closer attention to.

In Pennsylvania, Sanders because voters have era. The real reason we won 117,000 voters that experience polarization been strategically today is because voters have Clinton did not, and Trump misled into voting been strategically misled won the state by 44,000. In Michigan, it was Trump by against their interests.” into voting against their interests.

10,000 after Clinton failed It’s easy to think of examples to rally some 48,000 voters of this problem. There are working-class who went for Sanders in the primary. And in Americans who voted for Trump, but rely on Wisconsin, where Trump won by 22,500 votes, the Affordable Care Act for health insurance.

Clinton missed out on another 51,000 of the There are poor workers afraid of immigrants Sanders-faithful. stealing their jobs even though their state’s This doesn’t support the conclusion that right-to-work laws are what have prevented running a moderate Democrat caused Sanders them from bargaining for higher wages and voters to switch to Trump — although the few better protections against arbitrary dismissal. who did strike me as more than a bit disoriented Most notable to me is the fact that there are — it reflects the fact that moderate candidates countless Americans voting for politicians just do not have the same ability to mobilize who rail against estate taxes despite the fact voter turnout in their favor. People were excited that they will never come close to inheriting

by Sanders in a way that Clinton just couldn’t enough money to reach the threshold of the compete with. so-called “death tax.”

Either way, Republican strategists will Bernie Sanders understands accuse any Democratic that these divisions are not nominee of being as “Critics will say that result of inherent evils radical as Sanders. Trump running on ‘economic the in the hearts of some and campaign communications gloom’ and ‘class war’ virtues in others. The director Tim Murtaugh has explicitly said “There is no just won’t work, but real reason we face these problems is because the centrist lane,” when asked about Biden and Buttigieg. that’s where they miss ruling class has divided up the electorate and pitted us So really, it’s about whether the point.” against each other. Every the candidate who is stuck speech that frames one with the label is able to use segment of the population as a violent threat, it to their advantage, or if they collapse under every policy that criminalizes a population born the pressure. into circumstances no one could reasonably Another key indicator of Sanders’ strength escape, and every ideology that says some is his fundraising apparatus. The Sanders people must win while others must lose cannot campaign completely disavows big-money be the way forward. Critics will say that running donors — a move that would eliminate nearly on “economic gloom” and “class war” just all financial support from the self-funded won’t work, but that’s where they miss the campaigns of billionaires Michael Bloomberg point. The Sanders campaign isn’t about and Tom Steyer, and which would severely doom and gloom over the structures we’ve hamper the fundraising efforts of Biden and known about for decades — the real appeal Buttigieg. Despite this decision by Sanders, his isn’t some pessimism inherent to democratic campaign is still clobbering the competition: socialism. Bernie Sanders will win because, for With an average campaign donation of just once, voters have a reason to be truly hopeful. $18 and some five million individual donors,

Republicans lost their party in 2016. Democrats should learn from that.

DEBORA HYEMIN HAN, Editor-in-Chief

AIDAN SHEINBERG, Publisher

ALEX FREDMAN, Executive Editor PETER CHARALAMBOUS, Managing Editor

PRODUCTION EDITORS TEDDY HILL-WELD & MATTHEW MAGANN, Opinion Editors KYLEE SIBILIA & NOVI ZHUKOVSKY, Mirror Editors ADDISON DICK & JUSTIN KRAMER & LILI STERN, Sports Editors LEX KANG & LUCY TURNIPSEED, Arts Editors NAINA BHALLA & LORRAINE LIU, Photo Editors SAMANTHA BURACK & BELLA JACOBY, Design Editors GRANT PINKSTON, Templating Editor JESS CAMPANILE, Multimedia Editor

ANTHONY ROBLES, Managing Editor

BUSINESS DIRECTORS JONNY FRIED, JASMINE FU, RAIDEN MEYER, Advertising & Finance Directors HIMADRI NARASIMHAMURTHY & KAI SHERWIN, Business Development Directors ALBERT CHEN & ELEANOR NIEDERMAYER, Strategy Directors VINAY REDDY & ERIC ZHANG, Marketing, Analytics and Technology Directors

ELIZA JANE SCHAEFFER, Engagement Editor WILLIAM CHEN & AARON LEE, Data Visualization Editors

SUBMISSIONS: We welcome letters and guest columns. All submissions must include the author’s name and affiliation with Dartmouth College, and should not exceed 250 words for letters or 700 words for columns. The Dartmouth reserves the right to edit all material before publication. All material submitted becomes property of The Dartmouth. Please email submissions to editor@thedartmouth.com.

Moderates are the ones who will lose this race.

PAGE 4

THE DARTMOUTH ARTS

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2020

Review: ‘One Child Nation’ looks at Chinese policy in scattered way B y EMILY ZHANG

The Dartmouth Staff

“One Child Nation,” directed by award-winning documentarian Nanfu Wang, is one of the first documentaries to delve into China’s one-child policy. While it does so in an innovative way, the film lacks objectivity and coherence in telling the story.

The one-child policy is a birth planning program in China that began in 1979 and officially ended in 2015, created to limit the rapid population growth of the country.

Under the law, each Chinese couple was only allowed to give birth to one child and were subjected to fines if they had more.

The film screened at the Hopkins Center on Feb. 9 and, as written on the Hop’s brochure for the documentar y, promised to go “beyond the slogan of China’s longtime one-child policy to reveal a system of violence, corruption, propaganda and silence.” I became curious about how Wang, a filmmaker who was born and raised in China and moved to the United States in her 20s, would examine a policy she grew up with.

The film is indeed very thoughtprovoking, as it forced me to reconsider a Chinese governmental policy that I had not previously thought deeply about. In the past, I had heard how the lack of siblings affects childhood development or how the one-child policy leads to a demographic imbalance of the Chinese population. Yet I had never gotten a chance to know that the policy was implemented through a massive trend of forced abortions, sterilizations, child abandonments and family separations — which are shown in the film. To be honest, it was extremely difficult, and sometimes even disturbing, for me to watch the film, as Wang constantly employs images of dead fetuses and interviews about forced abortion

and sterilization to concretize the is shown and the voiceover that is impact of this policy to the audience. played do not match, leaving viewers Nevertheless, the film stands out lost about the significance of what with its dense packing of a series they are seeing. For instance, Wang’s of honest conversations with people reflection of how her childhood deeply involved in the policy’s was filled with one-child policy implementation, including former propaganda songs is merged with sterilization doctors, family-planning footage of kindergarten children in officers and child-traffickers. As an her hometown today singing a folk audience member, I really valued song that has nothing to do with onehow Wang incorporates voices and child policy or propaganda. Videos perspectives from people that I would from military parades during the Chinese National otherwise never Day celebration had a chance to “Wang is definitely are coupled hear from. with Wa n g Wa n g i s not one of those saying “China definitely not started a real war o n e o f t h o s e documentary against its own d o c u m e n t a r y filmmakers who seeks Wang’s filmmakers who to minimize their own people.” family watching seeks to minimize a traditional their own voices voices in storytelling; Chinese opera in storytelling; instead, she led the with other instead, she leads villagers is shown t h e a u d i e n c e audience through a in conjunction through a first- first-person account with her person account of the impact the statement that of the impact the masses the policy had on policy had on her own we re i g n o r a n t her own family. family." of gover nment Wang first lays propaganda. out the story of her personal experience growing Though I don’t know whether Wang up in a two-child family under the mismatched those details deliberately one-child policy, then delves into or simply out of convenience, the human-trafficking network of unnecessary inaccuracies such as abandoned children in China and, these can be spotted throughout lastly, addresses the adoption of the film and makes it difficult to abandoned children by families in fully accept the reliability of Wang’s the United States through Chinese narration.

Wang is very ambitious in the orphanages. Her abundant use of first-person voice-over quickly sense that she intends to expose many engages the audience from the very traumatic impacts of the policy that first scene of the film and arouses a used to be rarely discussed among strong sense of empathy throughout the public. Yet the main theme of the documentary is sometimes the story.

Yet this narrative approach made obscure, as she muddles constantly reminds me of biases in with too many storylines at the her storytelling. This was especially same time — toggling between true at the start of the film when Wang gender discrimination to human explains film footage with voice-overs trafficking, orphanage corruption in a confusing way that creates many to debates around abortion. Some misleading representations of her parts of the film, for example, are subjects. Oftentimes, the footage that filled with lengthy interviews that

have little connection to the one- name, Nanfu, means her parents’ child policy. At one point, Wang wish for a son — and she reveals she asked her grandfather to recount is the older daughter in her family how one of his children died from and has a younger brother. a misdiagnoses of smallpox and The film effectively demonstrates another from meningitis, and Wang the existence of problems like herself then revealed how her gender discrimination in Wang’s father died at a young age from a hometown, yet it would have been hemorrhage. Though these peeks more compelling if Wang spent into the hardships that Wang and more time establishing a causal her family have been through help relationship between the one-child the audience to contextualize the policy and the exacerbation of those environment that Wang grew up problems, like how the policy could in, neither of these two incidents aggravate gender discrimination are related to the one-child policy, by spurring more abandonment of making me wonder if Wang includes newborn girls, which in turn could those painful memories only to intensify human trafficking. Wang sensationalize the story and draw spends little time discussing those tears from the audience. connections. Not until the end of the In other parts of the documentary, film does Wang seem to realize the Wang effectively reveals many necessity to establish links between persistent the different problems in problems she r u r a l C h i n a , “Not until the end of discussed. Her such as gender the film does Wang unbalanced inequality, human account makes trafficking and seem to realize the the film less the corruption necessity to establish like a focused in or phanages. examination of links between those However, the link the one-child b e t we e n t h o s e different problems policy and more problems and the she discussed, yet her like a panorama one-child policy of several o f t e n s e e m s unbalanced account pressing issues distant. At many makes the film less like in contemporary points, it was hard u r a l a focused examination rChina. for me to grasp Wa n g ’s i n t e n t of the one-child While or extrapolate a policy and more like a appreciating the broader import. u n p re c e d e n t e d Fo r e x a m p l e , panorama of several angles that when she asks pressing issues in Wang employs the elders in to approach this contemporary rural her village to controversial d i s t i n g u i s h China.” government between an policy in China, e x t e n d e d I would definitely grandson, which is a grandson recommend “One Child Nation” as born through a daughter, and an a must-watch. But in the future, I immediate grandson, a grandson would also like to hear some more born through a son, she does not objective accounts that zoom in on explain how this connects to the the one-child policy itself, which is one-child policy. The intent was also something that “One Child Nation” unclear when she explains that her falls short at doing.

DARTMOUTHEVENTS TODAY 12:30 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.

Talk: “What Do School Photos Do?” with Marianne Hirsch and Leo Spitzer.

Sponsored by the Hood Museum of Art.

TOMORROW 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.

Talk: “The Lancet Commission on Arctic Health.” Sponsored by the Dickey Center, Hanover Inn Ballroom.

5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.

Talk: “The 2020 NH Presidential Primary Election: A Postmortem Discussion,” with Joseph Bafumi, Mia Costa, Dean Lacy and Ronald Shaiko. Sponsored by the Rockefeller Center, Rocky 003.

5:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.

Talk: “Putting the Anthropocene in Context: Global Catastophes in Deep Time,” with journalist Peter Brannen. Sponsored by the Leslie Center for the Humanities, Haldeman 41.

7:30 p.m. – 9:45 p.m.

Film: “Queen & Slim.” Sponsored by the Hopkins Center, Loew Auditorium.

ADVERTISING For advertising infor mation, please call (603) 646-2600 or email info@ thedartmouth.com. The advertising deadline is noon, two days before publication. We reserve the right to refuse any advertisement. Opinions expressed in advertisements do not necessarily reflect those of The Dartmouth, Inc. or its officers, employees and agents.

The Dartmouth, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation chartered in the state of New Hampshire. USPS 148-540 ISSN 0199-9931