11.04.16

2

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016

• NEWS

BRIEFS TUPD 10.28. 2016 1:23 a.m.

Location: Camille Lightner Residence Hall Injury/Illness Consumption of Alcohol by a Minor 10.28.2016 8:54 a.m.

Location: Facilities Services Offenses Against Property: Theft 10.29.2016 6:22 p.m.

Location: Susana Wesley Residence Hall Fire Alarm 11.01.2016 9:58 a.m.

Location: Verna Mclean Residence Hall Offenses Against Property: Burglary of Coin Operated Machine 11.01.2016 2:14 p.m.

Location: William Knox Holt Center Fire Alarm 11.01.2016 7:49 p.m.

Location: William H. Bell Center Offenses Against Property: Theft

SGA There was no SGA meeting this week. Their next meeting will be on November 7 in the Waxahachie Room in Upstairs Coates University Center.

Compiled by ALEXANDRA URI Cover by TYLER HERRON

Staff editor-in-chief: Julia Elmore managing editor: Grace Frye business manager: Dzung Vu ad directors: Lauren Harris & Christina Moore news editor: Alexandra Uri pulse editor: Emily Elliott arts & entertainment editor: Dylan Wagner sports editor: Markham Sigler opinion editor: Daniel Conrad photo editor: Miguel Webber graphic editor: Tyler Herron layout editor: Katie Groke web editor: Abi Birdsell circulation director: Maddie Kennedy reporters: Kathleen Creedon, Chris Garcia, Elise Hester, Courtney Justus, Haley McFadden, Alexander

graphic by TYLER HERRON

Is there a conversation you’ve been wanting to have but you’re not sure how to start it? Is there something you think the Trinity community needs to think about and discuss? We want to help make those conversations happen through our Let’s Make It Awkward series. Send your topics to trinitonian@trinity.edu

INDEX News................................................... 2-7 Opinion..............................................8-12 Pulse....................................................13-15 A&E.....................................................16-19 Sports..................................................20-24

CLASSIFIEDS Want to take out an ad?

Classified Ads are free for Trinity students. For nonstudents each ad is $25.

Send your ads to trinitonian-adv@trinity.edu

Motter, Alexandra Parris, Jeff Sullivan, Christiana Zgourides columnists: Alejandro Cardona, Max Freeman, Mia Garza, Sarah Haley, Joy Lazarus, Gabriel Levine, Alexander Perkowski, Emily Peter, Callum Squires, Nabeeha Virani copy editors: Soleil Gaffner, Julia Poage, Julia Weis cartoonist: Michael Miller photographers: Noah Davidson, Claudia Garcia, Henry Pratt, Will Insill business staff: Sarah McIntyre, Krushi Patel advertising staff: Melissa Chura, Jordan Williams, Rebecca Derby, Taylor Shelgren adviser: Katharine Martin

Contact Us Editorial

Advertising

Emai l . . ..............trin iton ian@trin it y.edu Newsroom. . ......210 -999-8558 Editors.............210 -999-8557 Fax.. ..................210 -999-7034

Emai l . . ..............trin iton ian-adv@trin it y.edu Newsroom. . ......210 -999-8558 Editors.............210 -999-8557 Fax.. ..................210 -999-7034

Onl ine: trin iton ian.com

Facebook: The Trin iton ian

Twitter:@trin iton ian

Identification The Trin iton ian [ USPS 640460] [issn 1067-7291] is publ ished week ly during the academic year, except hol idays and f inal exams, by Trin it y Un iversit y, One Trin it y Place, San A nton io, T X 78212-720 0. Subscript ion price is $35 per year. Periodicals Postage Paid at San A nton io, T X. POST M AST ER: Send address changes to the Trin iton ian, One Trin it y Place, #62 , San A nton io, T X 78212-720 0.

Corrections Spot a mistake? Email us at trinitonian@trinity.edu, and we will happily run a correction in the following issue.

Opinions expressed in the Trinitonian are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Trinity University, its students, faculty, staff or the Trinitonian. Editorials represent the opinions of the Trinitonian Editorial Board. The first copy of the Trinitonian is free; additional copies are 50 cents each. ©2016. All rights reserved.

NEWS • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

3

SGA SENATOR CANDIDATES

Juan Luevanos First Year Senator

Enrique Alcoreza First Year Senator

Mason Dunn First Year Senator

Charles Wendt Sophomore Senator

Alfonso Garcia First Year Senator

Benjamin Gonzalez First Year Senator

Calie Struby Sophomore Senator

Samy Abdallah Junior Senator

Ty Tinker First Year Senator

Manfred Wendt Sophomore Senator

Alex Perkowski Junior Senator

Katherine Donovan First Year Senator

Simone Washington First Year Senator

Travis Fulkerson Sophomore Senator

Lena Dennington Junior Senator

Caroline Wall First Year Senator

Ji Won Kang First Year Senator

Amulya Deva Sophomore Senator

Isaiah Mora Junior Senator

Jessica Rodriguez First Year Senator

Sam Afshari Sophomore Senator

Lavanya Hospeti Junior Senator

As president, Santulli will work to continue the progress SGA made over the past year by continuing to increase student engagement.

Santulli will also push to expand SGA's textbook initiative.

Khalaf will use his interests in finance and accounting to serve the Trinity community by developing and implementing ideas, such as a 3-year adoption policy of the open-source textbook initiative to reduce student textbook costs.

Smith believes that the actions of SGA should be as transparent as possible. As Vice President, he would aim to make sure SGA positions remain unpaid and that students have access to the SGA spending records.

Nick Santulli President

Daniel Smith Vice-President

SGA Voting ends tonight at 11:59 p.m.

Joseph Khalaf Vice-President

4

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

NEWS

The 2016 election was Election presents old full of highs and lows policies in new ways A breakdown of this year’s presidential race

BY CHRISTIANA ZGOURIDES

NEWS REPORTER

The finish line after what has seemed like an impossibly long election cycle is approaching.

Before the final votes are counted, we should take a moment to recall the important and memorable moments that have led up to November 8.

It started in spring of 2015 when Ted Cruz, Republican senator from Texas, announced his candidacy on March 23. Rand Paul, Republican senator from Kentucky, entered the race on April 7, followed by Democrat Hillary Clinton on April 12, Republican Marco Rubio on April 15 and Bernie Sanders, self-described Democratic Socialist, on the April 30.

A few additional candidates entered the race in May and June, such as Republican Carly Fiorina, Republican Jeb Bush and Democrat Martin O’Malley.

And then, on June 16, 2015, businessman and reality TV host Donald Trump entered the Republican race. Although some Americans may not have known it yet, this was a defining moment in this year’s election.

At this point, all Democratic candidates were in, but the Republican field continued to grow.

By the first Republican debate on Thursday, August 6, there were seventeen Republican candidates. The crowded field was unprecedented in recent history.

The 10 leaders debated in the “primetime” slot at 9 p.m., while the other seven were relegated to the earlier, 5 p.m. stage.

The debate, which aired on Fox News, set the tone for much of what was to come.

Megyn Kelly, Fox journalist and commentator, questioned Trump’s degrading comments about women, an issue that Trump spun to be about the evils of political correctness.

Bush defended his candidacy against the notion that “another Bush in the White House” would be bad for the country, stating that he was proud of his father and brother but that he was his own man with his own track record and experience.

Trump led the field at the end of this debate, followed by Jeb Bush and Scott Walker.

The second Republican primary debate aired

on CNN on September 16 and featured 11 candidates on the primetime stage, with four in the earlier debate. Trump’s insults continued to take center stage.

Just a few days later on September 21, Scott Walker became the first major Republican candidate to leave the race. He was the only candidate to drop out before the third debate aired on CNBC. The field then slowly winnowed down until only five remained in February 2016: Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson. By March, the field was down to four: Carson dropped out of the race on March 4 and endorsed Trump soon after.

The Democratic debates did not start quite as early. The first one featured five candidates and aired on CNN on October 13, 2015. By the second debate a month later, only Clinton, Sanders and O’Malley remained.

O’Malley would drop out after a poor performance in the Iowa Caucus in February 2016, leaving only Clinton and Sanders to duke it out in the last five debates.

Topics of discussion for the 10 democratic debates included water contamination in Flint, Michigan, race relations, income inequality, affordable higher education and Hillary Clinton’s emails.

As the debates continued, primary and caucus results began to roll in. Iowa saw a three-point victory for Cruz and a narrow win for Clinton, by 0.3, according to U.S. Presidential Election News.

Sanders won surprising upsets in states like Wisconsin, Indiana and Michigan, and the race became closer than many had anticipated.

But in the end, Clinton won with 2,807 combined pledged and unpledged delegates, while Sanders lost with 1,893.

Just one day before the Democratic National Convention, Democratic Party Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned over leaked emails that showed favoritism towards Clinton over Sanders.

Nevertheless, on July 28, 2016, Clinton accepted the Democratic nomination and became the first female presidential nominee in United States history.

While Sanders supporters were deeply disappointed in the results, many have noted that he shaped the conversation in the Democratic primary and nudged Clinton’s platform to the left in areas like free college education and income inequality.

Continued on page 5

Presidential candidates rehash issues brought up before to fit changing U.S. political climate

BY ALEXANDRA URI

NEWS EDITOR

In one of the most tumultuous presidential elections in recent history, there have been a few hot-button political issues. These issues, and how each of the two leading candidates have addressed them, have shaped the 2016 election and captured the nation’s attention.

According to the Pew Research Center, the top two voting issues of this year’s election are the economy and terrorism.

Other big issues include gun control, immigration, Supreme Court appointments, healthcare, the treatment of women and the treatment of racial and ethnic minorities.

This article will break down what these issues are and how Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have addressed each issue.

The candidates’ policies are taken directly from their campaign websites.

The Economy Clinton’s economic proposal includes a tax plan that would increase taxes for the wealthiest Americans, as well as a plan to invest in creating jobs in America and a guarantee for paid family and sick leave.

Trump’s economic plan is to “create a dynamic booming economy that will create 25 million new jobs over the next decade.” He also wants to cut taxes overall.

Terrorism Clinton’s policy regarding terrorism is a three-part plan. Part one is to take out ISIS strongholds in Iraq and Syria. Part two is to work with allies of the United States to dismantle global terror networks, and part three is to strengthen our defenses at home.

Trump’s plan to combat terrorism is to increase military spending to build up our armed forces. He wants to “advance America’s core national interests, promote regional stability and produce an easing of tensions in the world [and to] work with Congress to fully repeal the defense sequester and submit a new budget to rebuild our depleted military.”

Gun Control Clinton believes that there should be stricter gun regulations. She wants to expand background checks, take on the gun lobby and “keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, other violent criminals and the severely mentally ill by supporting laws that stop domestic abusers from buying and owning guns, making it a federal crime for someone to intentionally buy a gun for a person prohibited from owning one and closing the loopholes that allow people suffering from severe mental illness to purchase and own guns.” She will also support work to keep military-style weapons off our streets.

Trump argues that he will protect the Second Amendment, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.”

Immigration Clinton believes that we need a massive immigration reform to provide a “pathway for more people to full and equal citizenship.” She will work to enforce current immigration laws humanely as well as implement new laws to ensure more people can come to America.

On Trump’s website, he states he wants to “establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first.” This is vastly different from his initial policy to build a wall between the United States and Mexico.

Supreme Court Appointments Clinton believes that Congress should act on President Obama’s Supreme Court nomination, Merrick Garland. If he is not confirmed, Clinton would nominate a justice who will support her policies.

Trump wants to nominate “justices to the United States Supreme Court who will uphold our laws and our Constitution. The replacement for Justice [Antonin] Scalia will be a person of similar views and principles who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Healthcare Clinton wants to defend and expand the Affordable Care Act to allow more Americans get health insurance. She wants to make healthcare more accessible for more people.

Trump has said he will repeal and replace Obamacare with Health Savings Accounts.

He says he will “work with Congress to create a patient-centered healthcare system that promotes choice, quality and affordability.”

Interested in study abroad in Asia, the environment and Earth history?

Field Geology in China GEOS 3319.

This summer, May 30-June 20, a 3 week study abroad adventure across the beautiful mountainous terrain of south China (Guizhou, Guangxi and Yunnan). Led by Dan Lehrmann (GEOS), Zhaoxi Liu (COMM) and Thomas Adams (Witte Museum).

Satisfies interdisciplinary cluster requirement for the “Ecological Civilization” in Asia cluster of the Pathways Curriculum.

Cost estimate $4875 includes tuition and most program costs (including international airfare). For more information regarding the program and the application process, visit the Study Abroad website.

Paid positions available!

Continued on page 5

NEWS • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

5

Groups host election party Where did you TPROG works with SGA, TDC and PSA to close out election cycle

BY CHRISTIANA ZGOURIDES

NEWS REPORTER

As the much-anticipated results of this year’s Presidential election roll in, the Trinity Progressives (TPROG) in partnership with Student Government Association (SGA), Trinity Diversity Connection (TDC) and Pi Sigma Alpha (PSA) will hold a watch party in the CSI atrium.

The watch party will begin at 8:30 p.m. on Nov. 8 and will end when the results of the election are announced. This event will be more formal than the debate watch parties held over the past few weeks; cocktail attire is requested.

“For a lot of election night watch parties, traditionally it’s pretty formal. So I think this is just our sort of take on that,” said Catherine Walters, public relations and social media chair for TPROG. This watch party is also expected to draw a larger turnout than the well-attended debate watch parties. Walters explained that 100-150 people are expected to attend, but it is hard to say for sure one week before the event.

“We all want to see who is going to get elected as president. So we’re trying to get the biggest group of people out,” Walters said.

Nick Santulli, president of TPROG, explained in an email that his organization will bear most of the responsibility in putting on the watch party. Other contributing organizations were glad to participate.

“We’ve been wanting to do a results watching party for a long time, so it works. We were going to do our own, and then we found out that there was a big one happening, and the more people the better,” said Sean Watson, president of PSA. Huda Syed, president of TDC, explained the connection between her organization and the election.

“We were involved in voter registration early on this semester, so we wanted to continue that and do something to wrap up the election cycle and see what happens on Election Day,” Syed said. “In terms of diversity itself, we try to educate, and voting is a really big part of a college student’s life — we have to get freshmen registered, and if people are out-of-state or out-oftown, we have to register them with absentee ballot.”

Old policies continued from Front Treatment of Women As the first female presidential nominee for a major political party, Clinton has made women’s rights a priority. Clinton believes “what’s good for women is good for America.” Clinton will work to close the pay gap, fight for paid maternity leave and affordable childcare, stand with Planned Parenthood and fight against gender violence.

Trump’s campaign website does not say anything specific about the treatment of women.

His only discussion regarding women is from previous speeches throughout his campaign.

Treatment of Racial and Ethnic Minorities Clinton wants to “fight to break down all the barriers that hold Americans back and build ladders of opportunity for all people — so that every child in America can live up to his or her God-given potential.” She will work to reform the criminal justice system, protect the right to vote and end violence in all communities, but especially those who are most targeted.

Trump’s campaign website does not include any information on how he will handle race issues as president.

The event will provide a convenient way for students to have access to a live broadcast of the election results. “A lot of people on campus, I don’t think they really have TVs or have access to like TV networks — I guess this is an easy way for them to walk in to CSI, look at the election results and be like, oh ok, now I know,” Walters said.

While voting will be over on the evening of Nov. 8, discussion of the election will likely be in full swing.

“I think these things are really good actually, I think that they bring people together from maybe different political views.

And you kind of have to be civil and learn how to interact with each other. Because you’re in this space together. And I think that that’s really, really important,” Watson said.

In addition to watching the results roll in on multiple screens, attendees can participate in some interactive activities at the watch party.

“We’re going to have a blank map of the United States and we’re going to fill it in red or blue as the results come on,” Walters said.

There will also be a photo booth at which students can pose for election-themed pictures.

“We’re going to have little fun props that people can put on, like flags and Uncle Sam hats — pictures with those. And then we’re also going to have giveaways. So we’re giving away masks of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and buttons and stickers and bubbles and all that,” Walters said.

Sometimes it can take a while to have a decisive result on election night; luckily, attendees will not have to worry about getting hungry. “We plan on doing food, like cookies and brownies,” Syed said. Walters mentioned some additional food options that will be available, but these have not yet been finalized.

Watson explained that he hopes this event helps spark continuing political discussions on campus.

“What would be really beneficial I think, and really good for the school, is if we can kind of keep the momentum going, if we can help people have conversations. It seems like in the past few semesters a lot more has been happening, it’s been pretty vibrant,” Watson said.

Walters expressed a similar sentiment. “I know there’s so many people who are political science majors, but they don’t really have the medium in which to discuss these issues other than class, so this is a great way to sort of do that with a student organization,” Walters said.

2016 election highs and lows

get info during this election?

The internet, news outlets on Twitter like CNN. Chelsea Rodriguez First Year

Social media — Twitter, FaceBook.

Layna Hayes First Year

continued from Front The Republican race for the nomination had more contenders until much later in the game, although Trump’s victory was decisive: according to Bloomberg, Trump clinched the presumptive nomination with 1,543 delegates; Cruz came in a distant second with 559, with Rubio and Kasich trailing at 165 and 161 delegates, respectively.

In a move that NPR called “unprecedented,” Rubio attempted to keep his delegates after withdrawing from the race in March.

The move was an attempt to keep Trump from reaching the required 1,237 delegates he needed to secure the nomination.

But the “Never Trump” crowd was ultimately unsuccessful in keeping Trump from the nomination.

After weeks as the presumptive nominee, Trump officially accepted the Republican nomination at the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016.

At the NBC Commander-In-Chief Forum at the beginning of September, the two nominees each answered questions one after the other without confronting each other onstage.

The two would not appear on the same stage at the same time until the first general-election debate on Sept. 26.

The rest is recent history. Mike Pence and Tim Kaine, vice presidential candidates for Trump and Clinton respectively, debated on Oct. 4.

The second presidential debate on Oct. 9 followed a townhall format; the debate came just two days after a tape of Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women was made public.

The final debate was on Wednesday, October 19, leaving just a few weeks until election day. Most recently, the F.B.I. reopened the closed investigation into Clinton’s private emails, as some threads discovered on former New York Senator Anthony Weiner’s computer may be relevant to that investigation.

Early voting ends today; for many observers, the results cannot come soon enough so that the country can move forward from this lengthy election cycle.

Sources used for this article are NPR, AOL, US Presidential Election News, CNN Politics, Bloomberg and BallotPedia.

Facebook, CNN, Fox News.

Austin Crist Junior

I watch “The Young Turks” and “Democracy Now,” and I read the Huffington Post — no CNN, MSNBC or Fox. Mohamed Diarra Senior photos by KATHLEEN CREEDON compiled by KATHLEEN CREEDON

6

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2015 •

Presidential Personalities

Issues. Platforms. Political experience.

Character. The criteria we use to asses presidential candidates is multifaceted and the weight we place on particular aspects of their identities varies from voter to voter.

Not only do we examine personality traits before voting, but once a president is elected the job of Commander in Chief reveals a lot about his or her character as well.

In 1972, political scientist James Barber published “The Presidential Character,” and proposed a classification system of presidents based on character.

Barber’s classification system is displayed on a matrix with four quadrants. On the X axis are “Positive” and “Negative.” These refer to how they enjoy or do not enjoy politics. People who are positive are usually more optimistic, while negative are more pessimistic.

On the Y axis are “Active” and “Passive.”

These refer to how candidates initiate or react to conflict or action. People who are active initiate, while those who are passive react.

Each president or candidate falls into one of the four quadrants: Active-Positive, Active-Negative, Passive-Positive or Passive Negative.

While some traits sound worse than others, it is entirely possible to have a good president from any personality type. Lincoln, Washington and FDR are consistently ranked as the top three presidents of all time and each fall into a different category. However, it is generally agreed upon that Active-Positive would be the ideal personality for a president.

So where do todays candidates fall? It is hard to know for sure until we see them in office, but we can try to place them in a category based on what we have seen thus far. Where would you place Clinton, Trump, Johnson and Stein?

Active

NEWS

Positive

Negative

Adaptive

Compulsive

opportunities for action; enjoys the exercise of power, does not take himself too seriously; optimistic; emphasizes the “rational mastery” of his environment;

power as a means to self-realization; expends great energy on tasks but derives little joy; preoccupied with whether he is failing or succeeding; low self-esteem; inclined to rigidity and pessimism; highly driven; problem managing aggression.

results.

Examples include

Examples include

Franklin D. Roosevelt Harry Truman John F. Kennedy Gerald Ford George W. Bush

John Adams Woodrow Wilson Herbert Hoover Abraham Lincoln Lyndon B. Johnson Richard Nixon

Compliant seek to be loved; easily manipulated; low self-esteem is overcome by ingratiating personality; reacts rather than initiates;

Withdrawn responds to a sense of duty; avoid power; low self-esteem compensated by service to others; responds rather than initiates; principles and procedures and an aversion to politicking.

Passive Examples include James Madison Warren Harding Ronald Reagan Bill Clinton

Examples include George Washington Calvin Coolidge Dwight Eisenhower George H.W. Bush

by Julia Elmore

TFL hosts talk on being secular and pro-life Culture clubs host event for students to eat, craft and learn about holiday

BY KATHLEEN CREEDON

NEWS REPORTER

Kelsey Hazzard, president of Secular ProLife, joined Tigers For Life (TFL) to discuss the misconceptions of being pro-life and the uniqueness of her position as an atheist in the pro-life community on October 25.

Hazzard joined the group over Skype and explained why she preferred an intimate conversation, like the one she was about to have, as opposed to standing in front of a lecture hall filled with students.

“I want this to be a conversation where you can jump in and ask questions and not feel like you have to raise your hand,” Hazzard said.

Though the meeting brought in a new perspective for members of the Tigers for Life Club, a majority of whom are religious, some students question whether it would be more beneficial to host more conflicting beliefs at a future meeting.

“I think bringing in voices that represent all sides of the controversy allows for better discussion. It’s hard to understand something fully without being aware of all viewpoints,” first-year Dominic Walsh said.

Hazzard talked about the difficulties that come with the discussion of such a controversial topic. She explained that, when speaking with someone of different beliefs, she tries to understand why they have such beliefs.

“I always like to begin with asking a person why they’re pro-choice; there are a lot of different reasons for being pro-choice,” Hazzard said.

However, Hazzard finds some of the reasons to be invalid. When the reason that a woman should be able to govern her body arose, Hazzard questioned whether or not the embryo is really a part of the mother.

“The idea that the embryo is part of the mother’s body, I don’t find scientifically accurate. Even if it is true, I do think the bodily autonomy has limits. You can’t use your body in absolutely any way you want,” Hazzard said.

To explain this, Hazzard compared the relationship between a mother and child to that of conjoined twins. She asked if choosing one twin over the other was appropriate.

“I can’t think of a larger burden on your bodily autonomy than to be conjoined to someone else, not only for nine months but for life,” Hazzard said.

Hazzard then compared the changes in dayto-day adult life, such as the day after turning 21 and the day after getting a driver’s license, to the changes that occur in embryos, explaining that the changes in embryos occur much more quickly and intensely.

“We don’t consider driving and drinking alcohol fundamental rights, but when you talk about the right to life, you’d better be careful to avoid arbitrary limits. The right to life is a lot more important than the right to drink alcohol or the right to drive a car,” Hazzard said.

After explaining this, Hazzard went on to describe how the arguments that pro-choice people make seem to lack an understanding of prenatal development.

“I think a lot of pro-choice people make arguments that they don’t realize would, if applied consistently, condone infanticide. As a lawyer, I think the importance of consistency across the law is paramount,” Hazzard said.

Hazzard believes the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life” do not truly express the meanings

of either movement. She explained how both maintain stereotypes and connotations that portray their stances incorrectly.

“I think everybody is both. The pro-choice position isn’t in favor of killing people on the street indiscriminately. I think it’s ridiculous when we characterize people as anti-life. I also think it’s way over the top when prolife people are characterized as anti-choice,” Hazzard said.

Hazzard explained the hypocrisy she sees in the idea that the pro-life stance strips women of the right to govern their bodies.

“I look at abortion as taking a lifetime of choices away from someone. I support every other choice a woman can make. The only choice I oppose is the violent one,” Hazzard said.

Hazzard supported her claim by discussing the experiences of friends that have involved making a decision between abortion and adoption. These experiences have led Hazzard to separate the discussion of bodily autonomy from the argument of abortion and explained how a lack of resources is what really determines a woman’s choice.

“The bodily autonomy debate is really farremoved from women’s actual experiences,” Hazzard said.

The debate and the experience are not meshing at all. Abortion is overwhelmingly fear motivated. That fear is so far-removed from bodily autonomy and female empowerment.”

Hazzard believes women just need to be provided with the resources to postpone pregnancy and believes that if those fail, adoption is always an option.

“It’s the responsibility of the pro-life movement to give women as many choices as we can,” Hazzard said.

The group of students were curious about Hazzard’s participation in the pro-life

movement because it’s usually associated with religion. Hazzard’s secularism raised questions about how she got involved with it.

“I was raised in the Methodist Church, which is a pro-choice denomination, but I’ve been pro-life since I knew what abortion was.

I didn’t really get involved in the movement until I got into college. My pro-life advocacy was already secular because I was going against my church,” Hazzard said.

Hazzard then described the start of her group, Secular Pro-Life, in 2009. She explained how she attended A Walk for Life, a protest against abortion, and noticed the overwhelmingly Catholic representation of pro-lifers. She then decided to create her own group to spread awareness of the secular side of the movement.

“You don’t hear very often about secular pro-life people, especially atheists. I think it’s an interesting viewpoint,” said Barbara Bush, sophomore and member of TFL. The president of TFL, sophomore Luke Ayers, set up the interview with Hazzard after meeting with her at a conference in Austin. Ayers is Catholic but was not raised in the faith; he converted during his junior year of high school.

“My religious beliefs definitely have come to influence my views on abortion. It’s hard because you have the mother who is in this really hard situation, but you also have the right of her unborn child that also needs to be protected,” Ayers said.

Ayers brought Hazzard to talk to TFL to offer another perspective of the pro-life movement. Although Hazzard differs from Ayers in religious beliefs, he believes the angle enhances the goal of the movement.

“Those are real problems they are having. We shouldn’t pretend that they don’t exist. It’s not just a religious point,” Ayers said.

NEWS • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

7

VOTING

WHY YOU’RE

THAT WAY

The campus publications interns give their on the upcoming election and how they decided to vote.

Laura Gomez Quintero I will not vote.

It’s not because I don’t want to, but because I actually can’t. Witnessing this election as a foreigner in this country has certainly been one of the most heartbreaking political experiences I have ever been immersed in, and I have been in quite a lot, trust me.

Growing up in Colombia, Venezuela and Mexico, political issues were present on the news every single day. I remember vividly those Saturday mornings as a child when I was still in pajamas, and all I wanted to do was eat some cereal and watch my favorite Saturday morning cartoons with my little brother, but all of a sudden, the transmission would stop abruptly as it was announced that the government’s usual “nationwide broadcast” would go live in a few minutes. All over the country, children were puzzled as they wondered why The Powerpuff Girls had turned into a powerful man in a red button-up shirt talking to a camera for hours and hours.

I pretty much lived under some sort of dictatorship that lasted around a decade, and for the first few years of my life, I had no idea what this meant. I started to realize how awful and heartbreaking this was when some of my friends stopped talking to each other, just because their

parents had contrasting political views.

After leaving Venezuela with my family at age 11, I never wanted to hear the word ‘politics’ ever again. The whole political problem at the time, however, was not only a governmental problem.

Society had to do just as much with it. So as I look back, it is not just the government I feel anger or sadness towards, but also the citizens and how much hatred started to emerge between them.

That’s something that scares me about these upcoming elections here. Hatred is being praised by one of the candidates, and I just can’t seem to put my head around it that this country might have to deal with as much hunger for power and hate as I witnessed as a child. I thought the world was evolving and learning from the past? I feel helpless as I see hostility grow more and more, and realize once again that I can’t really do much about it since I can’t vote. Despite the questionable candidates that are in store for America, it seems obvious who the better choice of the two is. I just truly don’t want such hatred to be experienced by people here, or just anywhere in the world to say the least. Please be smart America, please!

Jacob Rossitter What a time to be alive. To live in the United States in 2016 and to be able to sit front row to the comedy of errors that this electoral process has given us is in my opinion one for the books.

Social Media platforms such as Facebook and twitter have only served to elevate tensions and deepen the divide between either side. What’s more, due to the nature of our 24 hour news cycle and the instantaneous way in which we consume information, many are prone to snap judgements about topics.

The two leading candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, each have the lowest approval rating of any presidential candidate in history. These ratings are in many ways a reflection of the public’s disillusionment with the two-party system, a system that many view as one that does not exist to provide the American People with anything remotely resembling a meaningful say as to who should be elected President, but rather an antiquated and impractical means to elect the candidate that is the lesser of two evils. In case it is unclear up to this point, I very much share this sentiment.

As the lead up to this election continues to trudge onward, as more news stories and opinion pieces pop up over time, and more facebook rants posted by relatives and old high-school classmates fill my feed, I am tempted more than ever before to put my laptop down and dive headfirst through the top of my glass coffee table. While of course an exaggeration, I’d be lying if I told you that the buzz surrounding these two candidates hasn’t made me legitimately sick to my stomach. I wish that I could look at the decision facing us this November through a more nihilistic lense, one in which I adopt an attitude where I can sit back and laugh at the grotesque events playing out before my eyes.

Unfortunately I’m burdened with the responsibility of actually caring about who is chosen to represent the country that although flawed means a great deal to me. For this reason I will vote for a third party candidate, not because of any expectation that they will win, but rather in the hopes that perhaps history will include a footnote of sorts indicating that enough people are fed up with such a corrupt system that has forced a choice between the dope and the devil.

Abby Tisdale Every four years brings excitement, frustration and an opportunity to expand our views past our loyalties to one party or candidate. Unfortunately, with this recent election, I have only found incredible frustration. In all honesty, I did not want to even think about voting for either candidate. In fact, I am slightly embarrassed to think about what other countries around the globe are thinking about our 2016 election year.

However, I do feel some sort of guilt in completely ignoring an election and the future of our country. I sincerely hope to not be a millennial that complains about the issues that plague our nation, yet continues to not exercise the civic duties we have been blessed with in the United States. I already complain about wanting to eat healthier, yet continue to hit up the Whataburger drive through on weekly basis. I can’t approach betterment of our nation the same way I approach the betterment of my diet. So, I will vote. But first, let me begin by saying that finding a productive process to analyze candidates and their platforms has become increasingly discouraging and frustrating.

Since my freshman year of high school, I have engaged in some type of journalistic hobby/job/

school work, whatever you want to call it. Owing to my many years of journalism (i.e. my high school newspaper and the Trinitonian), I would like to believe that I have some inkling of how to research and find reputable sources to add to my portfolio of political opinions. However, this election has tested my ability to find credible sources and sift through the constant, negative propaganda brought on by both parties. This election has been full of negative commercials, shocking press releases and cancerous rumors for both candidates. It has been crucial to continue to evaluate, and almost investigate, the candidates’ platforms and the reasoning behind the economic changes they plan to incorporate, any proposed to changes to national security plans or even the social ideas and laws they continue to stand behind.

In one way or another, I totally have felt like those famous journalists in movies that continue to look for the important facts and issues even when the public has become blind to the propaganda. I desperately hope that those who are exercising their freedom to vote do not get caught up in the high-school-rumor-starting-chit-chatting discussion that has run rampant through both campaigns. We must keep a level head, even when the candidates aren’t.

Lutfi Sun I voted only once in my life, and it will probably be the last time. It was also a presidential election, and I was away from my country as usual. It was quite a tough time for Turkey. We had three major candidates. The first one was a strong political figure with a pretty blurry past involving corruption and careless use of the state’s resources. The second was a politically inexperienced but academically well known intellectual. As for the last one, he was representing a large minority group using promises of “peace” as a person who was involved in terrorist organizations. Witnessing today, I see the significance of those days even better. I understand how a nation can be transformed from the Garden of Eden to a living dystopia.

During the campaign period, I used to look at US elections. At first, it did not seem like a good system. However, as I watched the past debates and looked through the critiques in the newspapers, I realized the election was centered around important issues that concern the majority of the citizens. The main discussion was whether the candidates’ policies can solve these problems or not. On the other hand, back in my country, people were arguing about the personal lives of the candidates. Candidates were also not addressing the real problems the country was facing. They were either swearing at each other or establishing grounds to be sworn at by the other candidate so that they will gain sympathy from voters.

Even though I did not favor any of the three major candidates in my country, it was not a tough choice for me actually. My feelings for one of them were strong: I wanted to spit at his face for all the insults he had made, for all the lies he had thrown into the air without any backing of evidence, for all the hate he had triggered. When this person I dislike most won the election, I hoped that, after the heat of the campaign, he became a more inclusive and considerate president who is worried about not himself but all his citizens.

Unfortunately, I was being a Pollyanna; things get worse every other day.

It’s quite striking to see the US in the position of Turkey now. The country I was once showing as an example to my family and my friends is now experiencing an election that is empty of wise discussion and full of arrogant fluff. It makes me so sad to see this country in such a situation.

I am an international student here, and I have witnessed the “outside” world, of which some of you are not aware. It is hard for a fish inside a calm lake to be grateful for the blessings of the stable water. Being from a stormy sea, I see and appreciate the opportunities, the freedom, and the welfare that this country offers, probably more than its citizens. I sincerely hope and pray that you, as a nation, will overcome these hard times and make America an “example” again.

I cannot tell you for whom to vote, but as a friend who has experienced a similar turmoil, I would like to suggest to you for whom not to vote. Please do not vote for any candidate who polarizes people. Do not vote for someone who encourages hatred. Do not vote for someone abusive or insulting. Even though you have not been offended personally, try to feel empathy towards who may have. Defending a Mexican immigrant will not make you un-American.

Putting your feet inside a muslim’s shoes will not make you terrorist. Fighting for your colorful friends will not make you less of a believer.

And finally, never feel a strong attachment to any candidate. You do not have to defend someone because you voted for them. Never say he or she is lying and stealing yet working for our welfare. I humbly encourage you to take a look at Turkey’s late history and read Scottish philosopher John Macmurray’s ideas about constructive democracy. You will see how freedom, skepticism, and public criticism are crucial for a democracy. Otherwise, the fragile nature of democratic institutions may end up in disaster as it did numerous times in history.

...

COMMENTARY Have an opinion? Want others to hear it? For a chance to be featured as a guest columnist, please submit your article to trinitonian@trinity.edu by Monday night to be in Thursday’s issue of the paper.

Opinion

EDITORIAL

We do not pledge allegiance.

During preparation for this Election Issue, our editorial board has discussed whether we would formally endorse a presidential candidate. Major national news outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post and The Atlantic have all endorsed Hillary Clinton, while a few smaller ones have backed Trump, Johnson and Stein.

However, we have reached the decision that the Trinitonian, as a publication, will not be taking sides.

As a group of 11 editors, trying to come to a consensus on one candidate to endorse could prove near impossible. Plus, we want to keep it friendly and civil — after all, we do have to continue to work together for hours on end in a confined space after the election is over.

Even if the board did agree, our staff is made up of over 40 other reporters, contributors, photographers, designers and copy editors, plus the ad and business staff.

Surely not everyone agrees on who to vote for, and some may be hesitant to have their name on something that supports a cause they do not believe in.

Furthermore, we simply don’t see it as part of our job.

We have a unique responsibility as the media on a university campus. Our newspaper brings insight to events, issues on campus and can highlight the interesting students and faculty at Trinity, which is something only we can do. We

have access to the voices and a platform through which we can publicize them. It is important that we help students and other contributors share their voice through our publication, and if those opinions sway readers one way or the other, then they have proven effective. However, when the media takes a side and promotes one ideology or point of view, our journalistic integrity is compromised.

Though those major outlets have valid arguments and the right to endorse their candidate of choice, as a student publication, we see our responsibility to be informing, rather than persuading our readers.

Peter Dahlgren, a media and democracy scholar writes, “I emphasize what I see as being journalism’s fundamental raison d’etre, namely democracy. Democracy, however, is not just an abstract or formal system, but must also be a way of life, whose impact guides thought and action in everyday contexts. From that perspective, the role of journalism extends beyond the basic elements of providing correct and relevant information: it must touch us, inspire us, and nourish our daily democratic horizons.” In our election issue, we hope to do just that. We hope the facts and opinions of peers and faculty will touch, inspire and nourish your democratic horizons and inform you as you decide how to vote, many of you for the first time.

Vote Lamar Smith

A case for the incumbent 21st District Congressman LUKE AYERS

GUEST COLUMNIST I don’t have any delusions about the political leanings of most of my classmates. National polls of college students show that about 60 percent of us identify as Democrats, or lean that way. My personal experience at Trinity confirms this. So why, you may ask, am I trying to persuade you to vote for Republican Lamar Smith? Of course I think he’s the best for the 21st District of Texas.

But I think I may be able to convince some of my peers as well. I also think that in a lot more cases than you’d expect, your views align with the positions of Lamar Smith and the Grand Old Party. There are a lot of things I could talk about.

When you’ve been in the House for 30 years like Congressman Smith has, there are dozens of successes worth mentioning.

A few months back, I had the chance to briefly meet Mr. Smith. I was attending an event in support of Susan Narvaiz, the Republican candidate for the 35th District (and another wonderful person), and Lamar Smith was there as well. He didn’t have long to spend, as he had other places to be, but I was able to introduce myself. He was a polite and somewhat quiet person, and I was pleased to see that my Representative was so level-headed and kind.

To start talking about policy, I’d like to talk about Congressman Smith’s record on the environment. While it’s true he has supported numerous measures to increase the production of fossil-fuel based energy, he has also supported measures to encourage the development of renewable energy sources and energy-efficient products. In fact, he introduced legislation (that became law) in 2007 that incentivizes hybrid cars, provides grants for solar energy and

increases standards for corporate-fuel efficiency and energy efficiency of appliances. And there’s a reason that he’s able to support both these kinds of legislation, and why I see them both as a plus. While it is true we need to protect the environment, we also need to make sure that the average American consumer isn’t hurt in the process. While we’re developing the technologies that will provide the energy for decades to come, we need to make sure that the energy sources we’re using now, namely coal and oil, are affordable for the people who rely on them today.

Congressman Smith has a record of that.

In 2008, Congressman Smith supported the Higher Education Opportunity Act, which helped make college more affordable for students and their families, especially those students with intellectual disabilities. He also introduced legislation that would make college more affordable for low-income students entering STEM fields. He has sponsored legislation to help small businesses and entrepreneurs.

These are real, tangible things that Congressman Smith has done in the House to help his constituents. I’m not asking you to agree with everything he’s done or stands for. I don’t. But if you weren’t planning to support him, I ask you to reconsider your decision. I do think it’s clear that Lamar Smith has been good for the 21st District of Texas and the U.S. as a whole. His experience as the former Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and current Chairmanship of the Science, Space and Technology Committee is invaluable. I hope you’ll join me in supporting the candidate who’s proven time and again that he has our best interests in mind.

Luke Ayers is a sophomore economics major.

Find him on Twitter @LukeAyersATX

comic by MICHAEL MILLER

Why you should vote

Hate the candidates? There’s always another way LIAM KNIPPENBERG

GUEST COLUMNIST

I don’t think that it would come as a shock to any of us if we learned from a poll that the vast majority of Trinity students do not support Donald Trump. Not only do they not support him, but I suspect that they view him as a kind of villain, one who is representative of all the backwards, racist, misogynistic, patriarchal errors that America has made in its past, and whose candidacy is largely in response to the election of America’s first black president. I suspect that many Trinity students feel very comfortable using Donald Trump as the subject of jokes and mock comparisons in their classes; I know I do. Even some of the faculty have been making jokes about Trump in their classrooms with little to no fear of offending any Trump supporters there. Finding Trump supporters at Trinity is about as difficult as finding one of Clinton’s missing emails.

I can’t say I’m baffled. For many of the same reasons as the rest of Trinity’s population, I do not support Trump. What did surprise me was how discontented people are with what they view as their only alternative, Hillary Rodham Clinton. While the major-party presidential candidates may not completely represent the ideology of all Republicans or Democrats, the parties and the candidates tend to do a pretty good job of appealing to almost all of their party.

It is pretty much impossible for one candidate to strongly represent more than a fraction of the population, but he or she will usually fairly represent the majority of the party. This doesn’t seem to be the case for the Trinity students that I talk to. While there are more students who truly support Clinton than support Trump, there are still many that think neither candidate really deserves the presidency. They just think that Clinton is not as evil as Trump. If you’re one of those people who don’t want to vote for either of the two major party candidates, this article is for you.

You might be considering some reasons for why you shouldn’t vote. Most common is the moral-objection position. Critics of voting for hated candidates will say that your vote is your voice, your choice and your support. As such, if you hate all the candidates, you cannot in good conscience vote for any of them. To do so would deprive you of the much-envied ability to sit back as the country burns and say “I didn’t support this.” This logic I have always found interesting, but ultimately unpersuasive. Voting is viewed not as a civil act to elect another citizen to a particular office, but an ideological statement about the country as a whole and the direction that the voter does or does not want to take. I think that this has some truth, but if it is the case, then voters should vote for the candidate

that they think will truly be fit for office. Third parties and write-in provisions exist, and if voting is really taking a moral stance on the direction of the country, then not to vote would be not to take a stance. How can you claim that you didn’t support a disastrous president if you didn’t vote against him or her? For the same proposed reason that you shouldn’t vote, you should.

Now surely at this point the objection is that to vote for a third party or a write-in candidate is to throw away a vote. Ignoring the fact that that assumes that voting is an act to elect a president, and not an ideological statement, which undermines the prior objection, this is just factually not true. If by “throwing away a vote” the objector means that the voter voted for a candidate with no real chance of winning (which is true: third parties and write-ins have almost no chance of winning), then the objector has associated the value of a vote with its “effect” on the outcome of the election. This continues to undermine the vote-as-an-ideological-statement view. If the value of a vote is contingent upon how it influences an election, any votes cast for the loser candidates are “wasted” inasmuch as they did not have an impact on electing the next office holder. People have conflated wasting a vote — voting for my really truly wonderful cat, for example — with merely voting for a candidate who will lose, which I have done via a write-in provision.

There are other reasons not to vote as well.

Maybe you think you are not informed enough?

Well, pick up the free copies of The New York Times that Trinity provides and spend 10 minutes a day reading. Maybe you don’t care, and so you don’t want to vote in an election that you have no ideological interest in. That is probably not the case if you have read this far into this article. Think that your vote won’t matter because of the infamous and terrible electoral college? Well, again ignoring the voteas-an-ideological-statement argument and the significance-of-a-vote-as-it-determines-the-nextofficeholder argument, this is also not true. The electoral college is not some anti-democratic beast out there that swallows popular will whole and transforms it into corrupt politicians who the country hates. Your vote goes to your candidate’s slate of electors for the state in which you vote, and your vote matters just as much as anyone else’s for the reasons I described above.

Voting is the fundamental liberty in a democracy. It is partly an ideological statement, but it is not just that. It is also your choice for whom you think will be fit for office. Casting your vote for only one of these two reasons isn’t fulfilling your ability to contribute to the governance of the republic.

Liam Knippenberg is a junior political science major.

OPINION • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

9

Uncivil discourse in the electorate

The venom of current discussions will not end on Nov. 8, but we can help restore civility to dialogue.

A few weeks back I saw a Facebook post from a conservative middle school friend that was highly critical of Colin Kaepernick’s protest against police brutality. The gist of GABRIEL LEVINE the post was that, by OPINION COLUMNIST taking a knee during the national anthem, Kaepernick was disrespecting the soldiers who had given their lives to protect the American freedoms that allow Kaepernick to protest.

Below, another middle school friend, who is now extremely progressive and was recently honored at the White House, replied, “You are disgusting and I’m so glad I’ll never see your posts on my timeline again.”

This one interaction seemed to epitomize the general state of public discourse during the 2016 election season. Civility has taken a backseat to rage, righteous indignation and petty mockery. This has been nowhere more evident than during the presidential debates where Hillary Clinton could think of nothing good to say about Donald Trump and where Trump called Clinton a “nasty woman” and declared that she has “hate in her heart.”

That’s not to say that the two candidates are equal in their coarsening of the dialogue.

Trump is undeniably the prime offender.

Vulgarity and offensive lies have been his modus operandi from the beginning of his campaign.

His approach has directly threatened the social norms that hold our democracy together.

This threat has come to a fore recently with his insistence, as ever without evidence, that the election is rigged and with his intimation that he might not accept the results if Clinton wins. Unfortunately, a growing number of his supporters believe that the election is rigged. Trump has undermined public faith in the process and is threatening the peaceful transition of power and the overarching focus on national unity that should follow a democratic election.

Contrast Trump’s attitude with the text of the letter written by George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton after Bush lost the election: “I wish you great happiness here. … You will be our president when you read this note. …

Your success now is our country’s success. I am rooting hard for you.”

That the civility of tone and content of the letter are shocking indicates the deterioration of norms of discourse in recent years. The larger question, though, is why such deterioration occurred in the first place and what can be done about it. The end of the presidential election will not be the end of the underlying trends responsible.

I’d theorize that the combination of immense social and technological changes within a fairly brief time period are responsible. Now is a time of transition, and transitions are difficult.

Increased automation and easily accessible cheap labor abroad have eliminated many of the jobs that provided stable livelihoods for America’s smaller, rural towns. With the loss of economic certainty, so too go social norms dictating civility in favor of any scapegoat or Trumpian savior.

The rise of instant access to news through social media and the internet has created an unavoidable incentive for news organizations to garner page clicks. The best way to do that is to create controversies that will draw people in.

As a result, websites like Salon, Breitbart and the Huffington Post race to the bottom with clickbait titles and hyperpolarized content. The rational middle has been cut out.

And really, that’s the core of the issue. The middle has been neglected. Part of that is due more to the social change. Now is a time where the country is rapidly changing in terms of demographics, and many minority groups are standing up to the very real oppression and discrimination that they have been facing.

Faced with such change, and loudly demanded in an angry tone from rightfully aggrieved minority groups, many Americans become defensive and decry political correctness or

prefer to argue over the specific methods of protest instead of the underlying reasons for protests from minority groups.

Concurrent with the defensive attitude of cultural conservatives, there is increasing intolerance from the progressive left of conservative views or any view that does not match absolute progressive purity. Recalling the Facebook argument I described earlier, it should be obvious that calling someone disgusting and blocking them is the absolute worst way to change their mind. Not only does such an approach encourage defensiveness, it eliminates the possibility for human connection and empathy that leads to the tolerance that progressives desire.

So what can we do as individuals to bring a return to civility in the face of a changing society? I think there are several options.

First, avoid websites or articles that rely on incendiary titles or hyper-partisan content.

Second, maintain perspective on the current time as a societal transition period where there will naturally be a clash of ideas. By keeping adequate historical perspective, we can better understand and remain calm about what we see. Third, engage with those you disagree with and when you do, engage on a personal, respectful level.

Gabriel Levine is a junior chemistry major.

What happens after we elect our president?

Bird brained

One of the strangest aspects of the 2016 election is the lack of a conversation about possible changes coming to our country once January hits.

Sure, both sides have ALEX PERKOWSKI slung mud at the other, OPINION COLUMNIST with accusations of potential destruction of our democracy running rampant. Many believe Hillary Clinton will destroy the rights of everyday Americans and raise taxes to draconian levels. On the other side, people believe Trump will deport Muslims and Mexicans while simultaneously running the country into the ground. Hyperbole aside, there are real consequences for this election.

Both candidates have elucidated some plans for the future of the United States of America. But implementation is a more difficult task.

Traditionally, presidential candidates seek the greatest mandate possible. This mandate, manifesting itself in the form of votes and elected seats, allows a candidate to set the narrative in their favor. When candidates and their parties are massively successful, it propels the platform to the policy table.

Examples of this include Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932 and Ronald Reagan in 1980. Conversely, a small margin of victory will result in a lack of the momentum needed to establish meaningful gains. Harry Truman is one example. Presidents need this display of support to maintain their election agendas.

In these days of especially partisan politics, the candidate who wins the presidency needs a mandate because it translates into control of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Congressional control is absolutely necessary for any policy to be passed.

Currently, neither party seems to have a chance to gain control of both the presidency and the legislature. While Clinton has consistently led in the polls since May, she needs a margin of about 12 points to gain the number of House seats necessary to gain control. Furthermore, the Senate increasingly looks to be split 50-50,

When Trump announced his campaign for the presidency back in the summer of 2015, nobody could have predicted Trump’s rise or his nomination, except for maybe SARAH HALEY Moore.

OPINION COLUMNIST Michael Historical evidence suggested Trump was the underdog to end all underdogs. Yet here we are, less than a week away from Election Day, with most major polls suggesting a virtual tie between Trump and Clinton, as either of their leads fall well within polls’ margins of error. So, how did we get here?

Racially charged xenophobia, a mounting domestic white nationalism movement, disenchanted Bernie-or-Busters and an international resurgence of fascist rhetoric and sentiment aside, Trump’s success is also a product of a social networking service just now entering its second decade of existence: Twitter.

Both Clinton and Trump announced their VPs on Twitter first. Not at a press conference, not in a campaign trail speech, but on Twitter.

As Twitter becomes increasingly important in understanding political discourse in the United States, academics have taken note, and there is a growing body of research centering around analysis of Twitter, its users and the communication it facilitates.

Social media analytics are viewed as a way of measuring natural conversation in a way that was previously not possible. Given a review of existing research, and a wealth of personal experience using the app and site, maybe I can attempt to shed some light.

Perhaps Marshall McLuhan’s famous phrase, “the medium is the message” is most useful in understanding Trump’s success on Twitter.

The characteristics of twitter and recipe for twitter success seem to match up very well with Trump. Tweets are a maximum of 140 characters long. This short form content favors shocking statements and oversimplification of

Mandates and goals leading to the interesting notion of an active and power-wielding vice president. This Senate prediction also troubles Trump’s candidacy, which while trailing, has still managed to hold on to a majority of House seats. There are many reasons for this lack of control switching from Republicans to Democrats, including gerrymandering and the simple fact that Senators are elected in a staggered format (thanks, James Madison).

Despite this, both candidates have put forth policy agendas for their first hundred days in office. Although Clinton has struggled to keep to a consistent message about what exactly she wants to pursue, her plans for immigration reform and infrastructure spending are often at the forefront of her speeches. These are issues that both Republicans and Democrats can get behind, and will be easy for the general electorate to swallow.

The electorate can generally expect the presidency to be an extension of the Obama years, which is part of the reason for a lack of a clear message. On the other hand, Donald Trump’s first one hundred days include immigration reform, tax reform, a repeal of Obamacare and economic protectionism.

The issues which drive Donald Trump’s campaign are also hard to glean out into any comprehensive policy agenda, but are primarily focused on those issues. To be sure, Donald Trump has a much easier path to implementing these goals, should he become president.

The first one hundred days are the best time for a president to implement their platform, should they have at least a notion of mandate. Unfortunately for either side, this remains a deeply divided time for both parties, preventing relatively easy policy changes from being implemented. The political climate does not lend itself to compromise necessary for a change. Whichever party inhabits the White House in January, they will need to look forward to 2018, and 2020, to hope to make any sort of change.

Alex Perkowski is a junior political science major.

What’s in a tweet? And would a political message by any other medium smell as sweet?

ideas. Further, Microsoft Research has found that perceived credibility of tweets is not associated with the truthfulness of the tweets themselves. Trump has definitely made full use of these unfortunate qualities of the medium.

Twitter is the birthplace of the hashtag; hashtags are important for organizing content and boosting viral potential of content. Trump’s campaign hashtag, #MAGA (an acronym for the slogan none of us can seem to get away from, Make America Great Again) is decidedly more catchy and less character-intensive than Hillary’s #StrongerTogether, making it more effective in the realm of Twitter.

In addition to his hashtag, Trump has developed his own signature vocabulary specific to him, both online and offline.

Offline, he uses words like “tremendous” and phrases like “Believe me!” His style is marked by overuse of punctuation, use of caps lock for emphasis, use of ampersand to make the most of his 140 characters, and em-dashed adjectives (“—Sad!”) to tie a pretty bow of ethos on his tweets. His online and offline speech habitus is so iconic and recognizable it even inspired a spin-off hashtag, #tweetliketrump, mainly popularized by Twitter user Michael Welch.

Faithful, devoted followers are crucial to achieving maximum circulation of a tweet.

Trump tweets out to some nearly 13 million of those followers each time, consistently earning tens of thousands of retweets. If that’s not effective use of the medium, what is?

In a broader sense, Twitter has changed the public sphere by accelerating the news cycle.

This runs the risk of leading to fast yet shallow political discourse. If Trump wins on November 8th, an event FiveThirtyEight ruled more likely than the Cubs winning the World Series, America is due for some serious reflecting as a country on what role Twitter plays in our elections and campaigns, and how it compares to what role we think is appropriate.

Sarah Haley is a senior theretical economics and environmental policy double major with a minor in mathematics.

10

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

One of these candidates is not like the other

Some say the candidates are equally undesirable. Those people are wrong.

AARON DELWICHE

FACULTY COLUMNIST Beware of false equivalence. Two imperfect candidates are vying for your vote. One of these candidates will win. They are not equally flawed.

One of these candidates wants to deport 11 million immigrants, declares that he will no longer honor US treaty obligations to NATO allies, encourages his followers to physically assault dissenters at his rallies, expresses enthusiasm for the use of nuclear weapons, boasts about grabbing women by the pussy without their consent, refused to pay hundreds of contractors (i.e. plumbers, dishwashers, waiters, real estate brokers, pollsters) for services rendered, urges the expanded use of torture, has advocated war crimes (killing terrorist’s families), mocked a handicapped reporter, claims that he saw “thousands of thousands” of Muslims celebrating in New

Jersey when the World Trade Center was attacked, declares he is “the only one” who can fix America, has avoided paying taxes on more than $916 million in income, launched a scam university that extracted millions of dollars from trusting students, argued that the judge investigating that university is intrinsically biased because of his “Mexican heritage,” has been endorsed by the KKK, was declared “unfit for the presidency” by USA Today, has failed to earn the endorsement of 49 of the nation’s top 50 newspapers (including several newspapers that have always endorsed the Republican nominee), boasts that he knows “more about ISIS than the generals do,” believes that global warming is a hoax “created by and for the Chinese,” launched his campaign by arguing that Mexican immigrants are criminals and rapists, bragged about the size of his penis in a presidential debate, proposed a ban on all Muslims entering the country, urged Russia to hack his opponent’s e-mail messages, argues

that the United States should close down mosques, suggests that the United States should seize Iraq’s oil fields and use the profits to cover costs of the war (also a war crime), lies about having supported the Iraq War, has been criticized by ten former nuclear-launch officers who stated that “he should not have his finger on the button,” has been denounced by 50 Republican foreign policy and national security experts who say “he would be the most reckless president in American history,” has been criticized by a group of 370 economists (including Nobel Prize winners) who warn that he is “a dangerous, destructive choice for the country” and has been accused of sexual assault by at least 12 different women.

The other candidate has been criticized for being “extremely careless” with her e-mail.

Aaron Delwiche is a professor of communication.

Not all politicians are on your side ALEX MOTTER

GUEST COLUMNIST Greed is one of America’s fundamental elements, and it still affects how we view politics today. Rather than voting based on policy or the greater good, voters have selected candidates who will serve their own best interests. So Donald Trump’s supporters ignore his bigotry and decide that he will be more beneficial to them than “Crooked Hillary.”

This mentality was shared by my grandparents, two Vietnamese immigrants who defied all discrimination and hardships against them to become successful in America. At home in Dallas a couple weeks ago, the conversation with my family naturally drifted to politics, and my Ba Ngoai (maternal grandmother) remarked she was voting for Trump because she was “only looking out for herself the candidate that would have her back the most.”

Oddly enough, Donald Trump retains a rather contradictory stance on immigration for my family. When my grandparents and mom immigrated to the U.S. during the Vietnam War, all three were almost deported due to a

complication with their visas. My grandma was nine months pregnant with my uncle at the time, so he was born a citizen. This stroke of luck allowed my grandparents to develop a new life in America and me to attend Trinity today.

Trump blatantly refuses to recognize my family’s citizenship as legitimate, using the derogatory term “anchor babies” to describe children like my uncle who allow their families to live in the United States. Does it matter that my grandparents used their skills in English and Vietnamese to help translate for foreign diplomats during the war? Does it matter that my grandparents worked multiple jobs and lived in extreme poverty so that my grandpa could go to night school? Does it matter that the only Christmas present my mom and uncle received was a Christmas wreath with candy that their realtor bequeathed out of pity? No. Despite that this is an essential right granted by the 14th Amendment, Mr. Trump still asserts: “I don’t think they have American citizenship.”

On the surface, this situation is bizarre enough. The notion of a fear-mongering bigot acting in the best interests of any immigrant, nevertheless a person of color, is absurd. But

the encounter also reveals a certain malevolence present throughout this election cycle: the candidate you feel is working in your best interests might not be. Due to the massive amounts of information publicized daily, sometimes the most relevant policy positions can get buried in the sledge.

It’s easy to throw your hands up and say “I’m done” in response to the nauseating influx of information related to this election. But it is more important to stay informed and intelligent when casting your vote because your future can be significantly impacted. One of the candidates threatens the very fabric of democracy itself by planning to imprison his political rival after a his victory. While Trump might not actively be taking away my grandparents’ citizenship, he could still try, and there’s a very real danger for huge part of our democratic government to be eradicated.

This Nov. 8, make sure to take part in one of our most essential democratic processes, and if you’re a Trump supporter, remember to go out to the polls on Nov. 28.

Alex Motter is a first-year Pulse reporter.

OPINION

Don’t vote Johnson

He never stood a chance Didn’t it feel like she really had it? Before the latest email news flash, it felt like we could finally turn our election notifications off. Baloney that we can’t. In fact, this whole JEFF SULLIVAN GUEST COLUMNIST situation is starting to feel so baloney that it’s made a few folks wonder, “Where are those third-party options?”

I suppose turning to a third party this late in the election could be condoned. After all, if you’re really feeling anything like your candidate Gary these days, then you’ve also publicly decreed, “Boom! I’d blow my brains out.” HBO is hopefully releasing a new interview with the Libertarian candidate soon, or at least I hope so, since I’d appreciate hearing the rest of his response to the question of what he’d do if tasked with picking between Trump or Clinton.

His candidacy has been given so little attention over the months that I was surprised at his demeanor in the recent Guardian taxpolicy interview with him. No headlines have raised suspicions on his campaign contributions or absences from the debate stages. I wondered what endorsements he’d acquired, since obviously Elon Musk could be one of them, right? After all, the last time I saw a piece of news about Gary was in September, when his “buckle up” policy had been revisited.

To address climate change is to make 2016 the year we prepare to board Falcon 9. Remind yourself that, in Gary’s eyes, the planet we temporarily occupy will face an inevitable engulfment by our own current life source in some nearer number of billion years.

Gary seems like he’s got a few things going on right now, and maybe this just isn’t his year.

Maybe it’s the stress of being the first presidential candidate to have, like, actually smoked weed?

He was the CEO and president of Cannabis Sativa, Inc. There’s your bit for business experience and economic preparedness. But maybe the Aleppo moment has him worrying that a few too many necessary facts have been knocked out of his memory banks.

Gary seems disheveled. The bitterness he espouses on camera right now has me feeling a little concerned about his stress level. I hear him — he sees the media’s portrait of an absolute fool for simple slackings in geopolitical “wherewithanything,” and it’s certainly a burden to bear. I just can’t get around the notion that being president means maintaining a certain face for a new watchful audience and a visible semblance of proper temperament when you’ve got moves to make.

Everyone’s still terrified of Trump, and so maybe Gary looks like a cool drink of New Mexican water. The thing is, he’s not. He’s a vote suck that’s polling at least 39 percent below Trump’s lowest marker. Also, you’ve got another news flash. A lot of Democrats have evidence to cite when they argue that Hillary could conceivably take Texas. This means one of two things for either of the other candidates you’re thinking of.

It’s been fun having Gary along for the ride.

It really is baloney that he couldn’t have done a bit better. The days of Bernie seemed bright, but please don’t think that Gary’s the sun to return those lost rays. To my friends who vote Gary, I’ll always appreciate your civic participation. Even after Gary’s lost the election, that Reddit thread suggesting the Musk & Johnson partnership could find fruition and a place for itself in the history books of space exploration.

Jeff Sullivan is a senior political science major. He’s also an in-depth reporter for the Trinitonian.

OPINION • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

11

The Death Konzo: A surprising sickness of the Vine Global Health professor explores interactions between illness, food culture ROBERT BLYSTONE

A eulogy for our favorite short-video social media service, which recently fell to social media competitors.

Ernest Hemingway is known for many things, including his six-word stories. They are micro-fiction stanzas that rely on the economy of words to create a story. A JOY LAZARUS OPINION COLUMNIST notable example of this is perhaps his most well-known piece. “For sale: baby shoes, never worn.”

Vines, like Hemingway’s short fiction, are composed of six units. However, these units are seconds. To be honest, I was never really interested in Vine because I didn’t understand the appeal. Basically, the app requires two things of its users: the video must be loaded to the app provider and the video can only have a duration of six seconds. The videos are also looped. In an article on The Verge, reporter Casey Newton claims that the six-second limitation spurs creativity and acts as a stimulus for eclectic videos. Many efforts on the app resulted in art pieces.

Vine launched in 2012. When it first launched, the app became a cultural phenomenon; however, because other social media platforms have picked up video applications, Vine’s model is no longer novel.

Instagram and Twitter have added video components to their apps, which permit videos longer than six seconds and allow for more material and content to be distributed.

Vines were heralded for their artistry, and some users even became famous after producing visually appealing or funny videos. If their videos had a lot of viewership, corporations would sponsor their content and pay them a fee for producing more.

Admittedly, my experience with the app is limited. The only concrete memory I have of watching Vines is actually not that concrete at all, because I can’t recall a single one. I do recall laughing and then blinking and then no longer comprehending what I had just seen.

It’s almost like the Vines are a figment of the imagination: they’re there and then they’re not.

There’s also this really great Buzzfeed post that makes fun of Lush Bath Bombs and Vines.

Bath bombs are a soap and sparkle concoction that, when thrown into a body of water, “explode.” Instead of throwing in a fizzy bath ball into a tub, people were throwing in things like toasters and potted plants as jokes and recording it through the app. The suspense of seeing a tap run water and a potato just thrown into a tub was ridiculous.

It’s sad to see things fade away. Instagram and Twitter outlived Vine because they expanded their scope and took over its territory. Vine was no longer needed. As a newer model takes precedent and supersedes the old, what was once prized fades from view. It’s sad to say that Vine has become out of date.

I’ll miss Vine, for its candid glimpses at life and its not so candid, fabricated artistic versions of life. I’ll miss the short six-second videos that tested storytelling by imposing a serious restriction to media. It’s nice to think a lot can be made from a little. Sometimes, though, people just want more.

Joy Lazarus is a senior art and communication double major.

FACULTY COLUMNIST

Imagine one morning waking up, getting out of bed and heading for the bathroom. In the process you fall flat on your face. Your legs will not work. With help, you find your way to an emergency room and the diagnosis is bilateral spastic paraparesis. Both legs are affected. Your symptoms resemble polio and cerebral palsy.

The ER personnel keep asking you what you have eaten. “Have you eaten cassava?” asks the intern who was born in the Democratic Republic of Congo. You notice that your ankles are twitching several times a minute. Your feet are stinging. Your legs just won’t move correctly and cannot bear your weight. Someone asks: “Have you been around cyanide lately?” You are growing more anxious by the minute. Is there a pill for this? What’s a cassava? What’s happening to me? Finally, the attending ER resident sits down in the chair next to your bed. With a serious expression, the physician says you may never be able to walk again but your symptoms are now in check. Your blood work indicates cyanide poisoning. “Have you travelled out of the country, especially to the tropics?” “Have you eaten recently the root of the cassava plant in quantity?” “It appears that you have Konzo.”

Konzo was first described in 1938 when over 1,000 people in a region of the Democratic

Republic of Congo, then called the Belgian Congo, demonstrated spastic paraparesis of the legs. Konzo in the Yaka language means “tired legs.” Persons afflicted with Konzo cannot walk well, if at all. In 1981 another outbreak of Konzo occurred in Mozambique; this time, a young Swedish physician by the name of Hans Rosling was on site. The right person was in the right place at the right time. He reported that Konzo disease is associated with cassava plants.

Cassava is a woody shrub that is native to South America and is found worldwide in the tropics. Also known as the Manihot, it is extremely drought tolerant and will grow in poor soils. Cassava root is a rich source of carbohydrate, and in periods of crop failure, the roots can be dug from the ground and eaten.

But the plant has a dirty, little secret. Cassava concentrates cyanide in its root. The root has to be dried and soaked in a very specific way to drive the cyanide out of the plant tissue. That being done, the cassava is safely edible.

Cassava is the third-most widely used source of carbohydrates in the tropics, with rice and maize being numbers one and two. Nearly 300 million tons of cassava are harvested every year with Africa leading in consumption. In Ghana, 30 percent of the daily caloric intake is from cassava root. You ask, why do people in these far-away places eat such a potentially lethal plant? Don’t they know better? One has to be really starving to eat this root.

Food culture is such an interesting topic.

In the United States each year, there are Cherry festivals in places like Traverse City, Michigan. Texas towns, such as Stonewall and Fredericksburg, have peach festivals every year. Apricots, plums and nectarines all have festivals. It seems as if every pitted fruit has a festival somewhere in the United States. All of these fruits have a dirty little secret; they each produce amygdalin, which can become a cyanogenic glycoside. And, pray tell, what can a cyanogenic glycoside turn into? Hydrogen cyanide. The citizens of this country all run a risk of cyanide poisoning every time one eats a pitted fruit, especially if we eat the crushed pit.

800 million people eat the cassava. At least that many people eat stone fruits. Why don’t we have Konzo in the United States?

In the spring term, Alfred Montoya of the department of sociology and anthropology and Robert Blystone of the biology department will team together to teach Global Health, offered through the international studies program. The interdisciplinary nature of Konzo and its study will be one of the topics discussed in the Global Health course. For more information about the course, please contact Montoya, Blystone or Nanette Le Coat.

Robert Blystone is a professor of biology.

For more information, read Amy Maxmen’s October articles in “Global Health NOW.”

Cycle Hub is a state-of-the-art indoor cycling studio dedicated exclusively to indoor cycling classes.

- Schwinn® A.C. Performance Carbon Blue bikes - Certified Schwinn® Indoor Cycling Instructors - Fun for all ages and fitness levels

First ride is always free Students $10 a class Teachers 15% off www.mycyclehub.com

12

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

OPINION

Trading reality for narcissism

Big Bend is one of the darkest places in the nation. Deep in the bowels of west Texas, the national park’s unique lack of light pollution results in breathtaking night skies. It’s rare that we MARKHAM SIGLER escape civilization for GUEST COLUMNIST the sake of indulging in nature’s artwork — part of this is probably due to culturally embedded Fear of Missing Out, and the consequential risks involved with leaving town for a weekend — but it’s mostly because we’ve been raised in artificial lighting to the extent that we don’t really appreciate the soul-striking power of a star-filled sky.

A true night sky, untainted by man’s progress, can create an interesting sensory fusion of solitude and connection. This fusion’s existence within American individuals is approaching extinction due to our increasingly solipsistic culture. We have become too easily attracted to the idea that we are the center of the universe, a concept that may have a perpetually platitudinous effect at this juncture due to its incessant commonality. It’s something we’ve heard from parents, coaches, professors and politicians since we were old enough to retain it. But, like most clichés, its seemingly empty propagation from these frustrated parties doesn’t make it any less significant. We simply need to make a real effort to better understand the implications a solipsistic mindset has on our lives and our society’s well being.

How can we understand that solipsism is an issue if it becomes too firmly entrenched as our reality — as a natural function of being a

human person? That is something we must be conscious of as we seek to define the term. In philosophical realms, solipsism is considered to be the view that there exists only oneself. In our society, this philosophy, once thought of as a potential means for ascertaining a transcendent truth, has been relegated to the unnamed director lying beneath our day-to-day actions, including in the way we treat our fellow man.

Millennials especially exist in this self-designed cocoon of what psychologists call “grandiose narcissism,” where we cannot help but to see other human beings in one of two ways: as a vehicle to the place you want to go, or an obstacle between you and that place. Typically that place is one we believe can fulfill us, through the greater absorbing of pleasure and power, and therefore happiness and purpose.

It’s interesting to reflect on how this could be some sort of gross distortion of the now hackneyed American dream. It was once a beloved idea based on our original countrymen’s hopeful usurpation of the centuries-old worldwide norm that freedom from controlling elites was simply not a part of this life. It was an idealistic aspiration, that in this land, inhabitants could pursue a life fully separated from corrupt elites, while in the presence of a loving, giving community dedicated to humanity’s flourishing. That is, in order for this dream to work for everyone, a purpose of equal prominence to your own search for free happiness need be admitted — the free happiness of your fellows. This part of the deal seems to have gradually been etched out of the American mindset, replaced with an upgraded dream of self-fulfillment. David Foster Wallace said this: “It may sound reactionary, I know. But we can all feel it. We’ve changed the way we

EXPERIENCE MATTERS! When one decision can change the life of your neighbor or family member, experience matters.

think of ourselves as citizens. We don’t think of ourselves as citizens in the old sense of being small parts of something larger and infinitely more important to which we have serious responsibilities. We do still think of ourselves as citizens in the sense of being beneficiaries — we’re actually conscious of our rights as American citizens and the nation’s responsibilities to us and ensuring we get our share of the American pie.”

Why exactly have we transitioned over time from being a people able to comprehend the sheer magnitude of the realization that we share this life with men and women who wake up each morning with incredibly similar hopes, dreams, faiths and desires as our own? When did we begin choosing to honor ourselves most intentionally, and develop the coping mechanism of self-worship? Perhaps it was somewhere along the path where we decided we didn’t need a creator in order to explain our purpose. The random jumble of atoms you see in the mirror could thusly become its own master. Perhaps, then, seeing others for what they are — tools we can use to mold our own worlds where we alone reign supreme — is merely the next step in evolution.

Most of us who struggle with solipsism can see it for what it is. It’s easier than truly knowing and loving others, and at the end of the day we believe it makes us feel better. But the apathetic monster it creates is inevitably revealed beneath the outwardly beautiful, competent mask.

The weight of loneliness and shame can crush this narrowed perspective, although some are more resilient to their moral conscience than others (see: Donald Trump). Inevitably, the crumbling mass of self-doubt and hopelessness, complimented by a lack of true connection to others, is made evident.

NORMA GONZALES Years Practicing Law

Markham Sigler is a senior Chinese studies and international studies double major. He’s also the sports editor for the Trinitonian.

OPPONENT

32

14

Cases Handled in Bexar County

1745

218

Jury Trials in Bexar County

OVER 100

0

YES

NO

Practicing Family Law

Many of the kings and queens of solipsism, men and women Americans look up to, provide textbook examples of this phenomenon’s existence that can be followed in the New York Times, on Facebook or in one of those ridiculous magazines you see in the checkout line at H-E-B. Those so concerned with filling themselves up mistake lust for love, pleasure for meaning and superiority for influence. I’m sure there are several names that come to mind. An escape back to reality will seem more and more impossible, as it risks exposing our true selves to a world we’ve only exploited, but never quite understood.

The Lumineers popularized a compelling lyric in their 2012 album: “The opposite of love’s indifference.” When I first heard it, my mind jumped to the juvenile conclusion that their main point is to illustrate that “hate” is not as polarized from love as one may assume — especially with regards to romantic relationships.

“Wow, how insightful,” I thought, patting myself on the back for choosing such a deep band to listen to on that particular road trip. Maybe that was their main point. But considering how indifferent solipsism makes us to the search for universal truths, truths we can share across national, socioeconomic and cultural boundaries, we are confronted with the disheartening idea that a self-first culture without communal and relational obligations is one no longer concerned with really loving truth or the people around us. It is frightening how indifferent we have become, sacrificing solitude and connection for self-fulfillment.

Dear Neighbors, For over 31 years I have practiced trial law in San Antonio and over 40 surrounding counties. My career started as an Assistant District Attorney and I went on to practice civil law. For over 20 years, I have been practicing family law and advocating for families in Bexar County and surrounding counties.

My experience with family law is essential to the position I am seeking. The 131st District Court hears family law cases every day - and you need a judge who understands the law. I am the only candidate for this bench who practices family law.

Unlike my opponent, who serves as inside counsel for a company, I serve children, mothers, fathers and grandparents from all over Bexar County. I have the right experience to sit on the bench of the 131st District Court. I have tried over 100 jury trials and handled more than 1,700 cases.

I understand the issues facing the court every day.

Hey Tigers! It is time to GET OUT THE VOTE. I am endorsing Norma Gonzales who is not only my step mother and a huge role model in my life but is also by far the most experienced candidate.

Experience Matters!

Leigh Anna Logsdon – Class of 2013

Pol. Ad. Paid for by Norma Gonzales for Judge Campaign, Margaret Mireles, Treasurer, P.O. Box 15342, San Antonio, Texas 78212

FACULTY SPOTLIGHT “Our government is unique in that we choose who represents us, if we don’t vote our choices aren’t represented. There is a cost: waiting in line, or an incovencience to your day. But the reward is electing the candidate who is closest to benefiting you and the country overall. It is a very difficult choice in this election. It comes down to who will do the least amount of harm. Voting is beautiful and everyone should do it.

John R. Hermann, professor of political science

Pulse

DIANA ROBERTS, center, shines under the spotlight as she performs surrounded by several other dancers in a piece called “All Things Hoped For”. photo provided by DIANA ROBERTS

Student earns prestigious chance to perform with San Antonio Ballet Diana Roberts, sophomore, has been training for opportunities like this since age three

BY COURTNEY JUSTUS PULSE REPORTER The sounds of ballet slippers landing on the stage mingle with the soft music coming from the orchestra pit; Diana Roberts dances

along to the beat, careful not to miss a single step.

Roberts is dancing as an English lady in “The Magic Toyshop” produced by the San Antonio Metropolitan Ballet.

“I’m really happy because they approached me to be a part of it,” said Diana Roberts, a sophomore accounting major.

Roberts has been dancing since the age of three and is trained in numerous styles, including ballet, jazz, tap and lyrical. “The Magic Toyshop” is the first ballet production she will perform in since coming to Trinity.

“I love ballet, and dancing has always been just a huge part of my life,” Roberts said. “I never want to lose it.”

Before coming to Trinity, Roberts was used to dancing over 24 hours a week. With her current schedule, she cannot dance every day.

“It’s a huge step not being able to dance every day, so it’s definitely been a transition,” Roberts said.

Practicing dance helps Roberts to release stress before going back to completing schoolwork and participating in other activities.

“Dancing helps me clear my mind.

It’s my happy place,” Roberts said.

“Being able to do this one thing I love for two hours straight helps calm me down and clear my mind.”

At Trinity, Roberts is also involved in the sorority Gamma Chi Delta.

She is grateful for the support of her sorority sisters and other friends.

“Hearing Diana talk about her passion for dance is amazing,” said Ruthie Rubin, a sophomore communication and Spanish major and Roberts’ roommate. “It is wonderful to hear someone I care about discuss their passion in such a positive and incredible way.”

Rubin has offered Roberts constant support for her passion since the

beginning of their first year at Trinity.

She encourages other students to go and see this production.

“I would say that students should not only go to see Diana to support a Trinity classmate, but also because it’s important for students to expand their horizons and go attend something like a ballet that isn’t something they would typically go watch,” Rubin said.

While at Trinity, Roberts intends on completing the five-year accounting program.

“Diana is very conscientious,” said Michael Wilkins, professor in the department of accounting.

Continued on page 12

Various professors reflect on their first voting experience Faculty members recall their early political preferences as the current presidential election nears its end

BY MIRIAM CONE PULSE INTERN As Election Day approaches, professors are taking time to reflect on who they voted for in their first presidential election.

“It was 1956, I was 21 years old and the candidates that year were

Dwight D. Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson,” said Colleen Grissom, professor of English. “I voted for Stevenson and my candidate ended up being the loser.”

Grissom has voted in a number of presidential elections since then and has found that her political views have remained mostly unchanged.

“I thought then as I do now that Democrats have a wider concern for the various socioeconomic and ethnic divisions of the American society,” Grissom said. “I’m very concerned for young people about women’s rights and making your own decisions.”

Like other members of the Trinity community, Grissom has noted the difficulty of the current election.

“I think that the sadness of this election is that it has shown such a division in the country around the many people who have suffered from the rise of technology and closing of plants, as well as those concerned about the environment, climate change and treatment of those of differing orientations and ethnicities,” Grissom said.

Grissom is aware that many Trinity students will vote for the first time.

“I have great faith in and respect for Trinity University students,”

Grissom said. “I think that if they do their homework, which most of them have and listen to the candidates, then they will make informed and intelligent choices. I hope they will realize that their votes really matter.”

At Trinity, course content may intersect with politics within classes offered by various departments, from English to political science, among others. Within all departments, professors are available to advise students about the voting process and help them make decisions about the candidates who best represents what each student believes in.

“I think that professors should help students learn to see party platforms, actions by candidates, and coverage by the press rationally and critically,” said Curtis Swope, professor of German in the modern languages and literatures department.

“Though our quickening pulses as we push the ballot buttons may indicate otherwise, our votes are not primarily a form of self-expression.

Your vote is about the whole country, not just your feelings,” Swope said.

Many professors have changed their political affiliations since their first time voting.

Continued on page 12

14

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

PULSE

Students studying abroad still complete ballots By submitting absentee votes in the mail, two girls ensure that their first time voting is a success

BY GRACE FRYE

MANAGING EDITOR For two weeks, junior environmental studies major Claire Burrus went off the grid.

Without any internet or media acccess, Burrus was effectively cut off, not only from her loved ones back home, but also from the election cycle, but Burrus wasn’t in San Antonio — she was half a world away in Tanzania, Africa.

“It’s kind of nice to be away from the drama of it all, but it’s also hard not to be able to participate in the discourse other than on social media,” Burrus said. “We never spent more than two weeks at a time without connection to the internet, but when we were on these excursions, participation was completely impossible.”

Even though Burrus has spent this semester studying abroad, she said it is not uncommon

to come across local Tanzanians debating American politics, so she is never uninformed about the state of the election.

“It’s also fascinating to me how polarized Tanzanians are also getting over this election.

On multiple occasions I’ve encountered people debating the candidates. Most of the locals we encounter lean left, but several, mostly older men, have been extremely pro-Trump ‘because he is a strong man.’ I am surprised both that people know about what’s going on and that they are picking sides,” Burrus said.

Junior English major Emily Wood has also spent her fall semester studying abroad.

Wood is currently studying in England and has noticed the American election become increasingly important.

“As nice as it is to have some distance from the presidential race and give more attention to things going on in the rest of the world, the rest of the world is very aware of how important the election is,” Wood said. “It’s often one of the first things other students will bring up after realizing I’m American, and I’ve heard more than one Brit express a desire to vote because of how much the outcome will affect them as well.”

While Wood engages with British students about the current election cycle, being out of the country has reduced her exposure to the U.S. political atmosphere and U.S. media.

However, this has not stopped her from voting.

“Absentee voting requires a little more planning, but it’s not any more difficult than voting in person — and not waiting in lines is definitely a plus. I applied for my ballot in mid-September just before I left, and I got it in the mail at the end of the month. U.K. mail is really reliable, which makes it pretty easy to vote from here compared to other places,” Wood said. “I sent my ballot out two weeks before election day, and the guy at the post office said it should arrive within five business days. ‘As long as you’re not voting for Trump,’ he said, but I’m sure he was joking.”

Burrus also took advantage of absentee voting. Using online voting tools, she was able to vote early in Bexar County.

“Bexar County actually made it easy for me through their online voting system. I set everything up before leaving the U.S. so that it would go swimmingly. Many of my classmates here had similar setups and plenty have already submitted their ballots as well,” Burrus said.

Good friends are there when you need them.

We’re right here. 24/7.

Burrus said she has also noticed a significant focus on American politics in the Tanzanian media, something she never expected to see.

“I was exposed to a good amount of Tanzanian media, much of which covers American news, among other things,” Burrus said. “There is a huge glorification of all things American culture here, and American politics affect the economy of Tanzania more than I ever expected, so people tend to be relatively tuned in. This is because a large portion of the Tanzanian economy is dependent on ecotourism, which is heavily filled with American tourists.”

Wood said she does not know what to expect when she returns to Texas and the results of the elections have been solidified. But no matter the outcome, she is proud to participate in her first presidential election — even from 5,000 miles away.

“I’m not sure what to expect when I get back to the States — it depends a lot on the outcome of the election, I suppose. But I’m glad that I at least made the effort to exercise my right to vote while I’m out of the country because I know I won’t regret making my voice heard,”

Ballerina continued from Front Wilkins continued to praise Roberts for her ability to appropriately manage her extracurriculars with her academics.

“She is very well-organized and has a great personality, so I think that she will add value to the program.”

Wilkins has provided Roberts with advice and guidance as she gets ready to declare her major in accounting. She has attended various recruiting events aimed at those who expressed interest early on in the major.

“I’m sure that [Diana] will be successful and I am glad to see that she has other interests outside of accounting. I wish her the best,” Wilkins said.

“The Magic Toyshop” will be performed Nov. 12 at 7 p.m. and Nov. 13 at 2:30 p.m. at the Lila Cockrell Theatre. Tickets range in price from $10 to $40 and are available for puchase online through the San Antonio Metropolitan Ballet website.

First vote continued from Front

210.930.4500 We are a group of highly experienced emergency physicians, nurses and technicians, specializing in rapid, patient-centered healthcare for families and folks in and around Alamo Heights.

We offer a full range of services including:

Treatment of Injuries & Illnesses • Direct Hospital Admission • Immunizations • Lab Services But more than that • Ultrasound we are your neighbors.

And that’s how we treat you. • X-rays • CT scans

6496 N. New Braunfels Ave. San Antonio, Texas 78209 theemergencyclinic.com

“I first voted in the 1984 election when I was 18 years old and I voted for Walter Mondale,” said John Hermann, professor of political science. “I’ve kind of moved ideologically since then.”

From an early age, Hermann’s family helped to influence his political views.

“I grew up with parents who were very democratic,” Hermann said. “My grandmother, who had the greatest influence on me, was actually a huge Ronald Reagan fan.

Hermann believes that every student should exercise their political rights by going out to vote in this election, especially with their rights as citizens of the United States. There are countries in which citizens have much less freedom to vote or, in the case of Italy, get taxed if they do not vote.

“I would argue, as a political scientist, that it is a responsibility of every citizen to do their research and to figure out which candidate would benefit their values the most and which would be best for our country,” Hermann said.

The presidential election will take place on Tuesday, Nov. 8. Voting stations are accessible at various sites in San Antonio. Students have until the end of that day to vote and are encouraged to vote early if possible.

PULSE • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

15

The 24-Hour Giving Challenge successfully exceeds fundraising goals Alumni and students give over 1,200 gifts in exchange for $75,000 from anonymous donors

BY MIRIAM CONE PULSE INTERN

With the semester halfway over, students are feeling the drain of schoolwork and looking for emotional pick-me-ups. A surprising opportunity came this past week with the 24Hour Challenge.

Office of Annual Giving organized the challenge and had help from the Student Ambassadors. This year was the second time this event was held. Last year, the Trinity community was challenged to make 480 different gifts. The goal was easily met, with students making over 100 donations.

“We were very successful last year, which was why the goal this year was so much higher.

It’s a little scary,” said Cynthia Uviedo, the associate director of reunion giving.

The challenge this year was to have over 1,200 donations within 24 hours, from 12 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. on Oct. 26. If the goal was met within the 24 hours, a group of anonymous donors would collectively donate $75,000 to scholarships and financial aid. Individual gifts could be designated to anything on campus like a specific department.

All members of the Trinity community could make gifts online, but students, faculty and

staff could also stop by in the lobby of the Coates University Center to donate in person.

The donation table became a source of excitement as Annual Giving and Student Ambassadors handed out 24-Hour Giving Challenge t-shirts to every fourth student donor, in order to get increased student participation from last year.

“The challenge cultivates a love to give back to a school that has provided so much, and it creates a realization of how important it is to give back. Students are the ones directly benefiting from the 24-Hour Challenge.

Giving makes so many of the scholarships and opportunities Trinity provides possible,” said Emme Bettes, a sophomore communication major, about the benefits of student participation.

Dean of students, David Tuttle, also tried to increase student involvement by challenging them: for every student that donated from 12 a.m. to 4 p.m., he would do a push-up during Nacho Hour. As of 10 a.m., he only had to do seven, but the number climbed as more students heard about it. The mini challenge came to a close with 174 donations. The crowd that had gathered to watch Tuttle do the push-ups counted aloud to cheer him on.

Tuttle took some brief breaks during his pushups to catch his breath or crack a joke, always maintaining his cheery attitude.

The energy on campus even reached those who are no longer on campus, like Dan Farris, an alum who graduated in 2016 with a B.A. in psychology.

“Throughout the day on Wednesday [I received updates] from Facebook posts from

graphic by TYLER HERRON

friends that were current students and also emails giving updates about events happening during the challenge, such as when Dean Tuttle did the push-ups,” Farris said. “Hearing about these events and names of faculty members I’m used to hearing makes me feel more involved about what’s going on on the campus, especially because a lot of events I hear about are just meant for the current students only.”

The energy of the challenge continued into the evening when the goal was met and

then surpassed. Ultimately, there were 1,311 donations with 232 from students and 603 from alumni.

While students and other members of the Trinity community can always donate, students will have a unique chance in the month of November. Thank-A-Giver week is from Nov. 13 to 18. Students will have the opportunity to thank people who have donated, while also being able to donate to funds themselves. Results will be announced online and in LeeRoy.

To vote or not to vote? For some students, that’s not an easy question As the opportunities to go to the polls come to a close, some have considered not submitting a ballot at all

BY EMILY ELLIOTT PULSE EDITOR As the 2016 presidential election nears its conclusions, voters have begun reflecting on the variety of ‘firsts’ this race has introduced.

For example, this is the first election in which both candidates of the two major parties have high disapproval ratings; this is the first election in recent history that Texas has been labeled a swing state instead of a red state; and, for many Trinity students, this will be the first presidential election they can vote in.

As a majority of students were not yet 18 during the 2012 presidential election, this current race allows most students to exercise their right to vote for the first time. As students have hurried to the booths and completed absentee ballots during this period of early voting, they’ve shared pictures with ‘I Voted!’ stickers and details of their choices to declare their patriotism to others.

Other students, however, are hesitant to approach the polls. As previously mentioned, this is the first election in which the approval ratings of major party candidates are unnervingly low. In an effort to find alternative ways of expressing their patriotism, some students have considered not voting at all in this election for a variety of reasons.

“The nature of [Donald Trump’s] character makes him fundamentally unfit for a lot of the reasons Mitt Romney laid out: misogyny,

greed, bullying. For Clinton, it’s also an ideological difference between the two of us; I think that her record of civil service is not qualifying of the highest office. In different ways from Trump, she is unfit by her character to lead as well,” said Eloise Warren, a senior environmental studies major.

Warren had not planned to abstain from voting in this election, as she was hopeful that she could vote for other candidates she felt she could really support.

“I was interested in the Bernie train, then fell of the Bernie train before the primaries.

I was a little worried about it, voted for him, then thought I had to support Clinton after he lost. Then I read more into Stein’s policies, and even though I like her ideas, there was some back and forth about some of her policies, like vaccination. That was very confusing for me. I think it might be a politican problem, you have to do what you can to back your supporters,” Warren said.

Warren researched other candidates not affiliated with the major parties, however, to see if she could find a smaller party candidate she agreed with.

“I went to a Green Party rally in San Antonio about two weeks ago, and it was really groovy and hippie, but it was a cool to see people come together,” Warren said.

Despite considering not voting based on some of the questionable actions of the two major parties, Warren eventually decided to vote for a candidate she felt confident she could stand behind.

“I went ahead and voted. I knew if I was going to vote that I was going to plan on waiting until Nov. 8, then I realized maybe because this election is as crazy as it is, I didn’t want to wait in a crazy line. So I had slept on it, and the next day I thought about why I

should be doing this if it could possibly take votes away from the person I don’t agree with, but is absolutely crazy,” Warren said.

Although Warren had completed significant research on each of the candidates and their running mates, she still wishes more information was available for voters to consider when filling out ballots.

“I thought the debates were stupid; I didn’t watch the first one, but I did watch the second and third. I also went ahead and watched Jill’s commentary. I really would have liked to see a debate between Jill Stein and Gary Johnson, however, I asked my friends who support Johnson, and according to them and Jill Stein, he declined the invitation to debate. So far, however, the most disappointing part of the election has been the Republican primaries. I think that is where things really started to head south.” Warren said.

The dispositions of Clinton and Trump throughout the election have continued to influence cautious students to consider not voting for either major party.

“Nothing about this election made me consider not voting. The nature of both the candidates has caused me to consider not voting for the major party candidates,” said Liam Knippenberg, a junior political science major. “I did vote absentee from Georgia. I wrote in a candidate, Evan McMullin.”

By watching the debates and learning about the policies and behaviors of candidates, Knippenberg felt more secure in his decision to consider not voting.

“I watched the first presidential debate, the vice presidential candidates debate, most of the second presidential debate and some highlights of the third. I think they reaffirmed what I already thought of Hilary Clinton, and that some things happened that caused

supporters to leave Trump, like his refusal to accept a Democratic win. They were helpful in as much as they were entertaining.”

Knippenberg said.

Although he wrote in a candidate, Knippenberg has other expectations about what the results of this election will be.

“It’s promising that Hilary Clinton is going to win this election. It’s not promising that she will be a really fit commander in chief, but I have faith that the constitutional republic will do their service,” Knippenberg said.

Despite watching the debates and considering what candidates have to say, some students have yet to be convinced to go to the polls.

“I think the debates just more so confirmed that I wasn’t voting. Those were hard to watch,” said Kacie Pollard, sophomore English major.

Students who are indecisive about voting may also be discouraged by how negative the presidential race appears to be.

“Nothing about this debate is promising. I think a lot more negative stuff has and will come out of this election than anything that could be promising,” Pollard said.

The candidates have failed to appear as relatable as potential voters may prefer, causing them to contemplate the option to not vote for anyone.

“I have considered not voting because I didn’t feel comfortable voting for either candidate nor just voting to keep someone out of office. There just wasn’t a candidate that I like completely or majority agreed with their policies and beliefs,” Pollard said.

The decision to vote in this election is a serious consideration to make; one should do ample research on each of the candidates before completing their ballot.

Early voting will continue until Nov. 4, while the last day to vote will be Nov. 8.

AE &

Cubs break 108-year streak of not winning

“Ouija: Origin of Evil” soils pants of millions

Baseball fans need no reminding of this historic event. For the first time since 1908, the Chicago Cubs won the World Series. That’ll show ‘em.

The terrifying Halloween movie about an innocuous sounds like an upgraded “Jumanji,” but actually serves as a brilliant deconstruction of poltergeist/occult movies while delivering a horrifying, stain-worthy story.

Scylla or Charybdis, for the next four years As I sit at my desk writing this column, I am enduring a very DAVID CROCKETT unpleasant GUEST WRITER “bowel prep” for a surgical procedure I am about to undergo. As my body does all sorts of nasty and unnatural things, it strikes me that this is a perfect metaphor for the 2016 presidential race. It’s hard to think of another race in American history in which the two major party candidates were so unpopular.

Maybe Buchanan-Fremont in 1856?

But we lack polls to confirm that (reasonable) speculation.

Democrats have nominated Hillary Clinton, playing the double game of dynastic politics and identity politics. It is pretty clear that the Democratic Party nomination race was a rejection of Bill Clintonism —his third way moderation of the 1990s, NAFTA, balanced budgets, the Defense of Marriage Act and “the era of big government is over.”

Yeah, right. But Clinton got lucky, as her only serious challenger was someone who is not even a member of her party. Democrats picked a tremendously flawed candidate because it was her turn.

And Clinton IS a tremendously flawed candidate. She has been in the national spotlight for a quarter century, drawing the fierce opposition of conservatives from the beginning with her derisive remarks about “baking cookies” (demonstrating contempt for stayat-home moms), continuing with her lead effort to gain control of the health care industry in the 1990s, culminating in her deflection of her husband’s sexual peccadilloes to “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

Add to that her penchant for Nixonian secrecy and enemies lists, her obvious prevarication on the Benghazi attack, her over-weening desire for money, her catastrophic

graphic by TYLER HERRON

lack of judgment and her willingness to skirt the rules for the sake of power and it’s no surprise the race is as close as it is. She is, in short, a liar and a cheater.

I have a neighbor who confessed to me last summer that if Satan himself were running for the presidency, he would vote for Satan before he would vote for Hillary Clinton.

And yet — Hillary Clinton is the odds-on favorite to win because

she is running against someone who is morally, intellectually and temperamentally unqualified for the office of the presidency.

Republicans—supposedly the conservative party in America— have nominated in Donald Trump someone who is not a conservative at all. Indeed, he is a Johnny-comelately to the Republican Party. For years I have watched conservative media types complain about RINOs

(Republican in name only) running the GOP, and the party has now nominated the biggest RINO in political history.

Trump’s own self-description testifies to the fact that he is a moral degenerate. Yes, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton were/are moral degenerates, too—but that just makes my case.

Trump disrespects politics and the political process. He thinks he can

get up to speed on policy issues by cramming in a January term before his inauguration. He considers vengeance to be the most important “virtue.” He has an excessively fragile ego and is easily provoked.

For those voters who call themselves conservative, Trump represents the end of Reagan conservatism – certainly if he wins, and quite possibly if he loses.

Where does that leave us? A Clinton victory likely means Democrats take narrow control of the Senate—but not the House of Representatives.

That means four more years like the last six. Clinton will be incapable of prosecuting a positive legislative agenda on her own terms. The narrow Democratic majority will resort to the so-called “nuclear option” in the Senate to confirm Supreme Court nominations, but the party’s exposure in the 2018 midterm elections means the GOP will reclaim control.

A Trump victory probably means the GOP retains narrow control of the Senate – the House, again, is not much in doubt. But the GOP Senate will not be filibuster-proof, and Republicans will resort to the nuclear option to confirm court nominations. The more interesting question is whether a Trump victory means the GOP will stay a conservative party or conform to a Trumpist agenda. Trump clearly does not care about the organization he currently leads, so there is no guarantee that he will be able to command the loyalty of his party in the House and the Senate.

Whoever wins next week will run into the buzz saw of the constitutional order. Both candidates have over-promised, and the fans of the victor will be disappointed when the winner cannot suspend the separation of powers system to fulfill his or her many pledges.

That still leaves citizens with an onerous choice. Satan vs. Trump; Clinton vs. Beelzebub. Perhaps we do, indeed, get the government we truly deserve.

Election confuses Doomsday Cult members SATIRE For those of us who have been living in the outside world, the upcoming ALEJANDRO CARDONA e l e c t i o n has been an A&E WRITER inescapable fixture in our lives. But I know that’s not the case for you. You’ve been living in a bunker for the past 16 months, and you’ve just now emerged to witness the dumpster fire that is the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. We are so sorry.

Before you were convinced by Reverend Phillips to follow him into his underground facility (in order to avoid the impending apocalypse), you believed in civic engagement.

You understood that voting is a fundamental way of exercising your democratic rights.

Incidentally, you are being called upon to vote on Tuesday, November 8, but how should you vote? How could you possible cram for an election this confusing? After all, you’ve spent the past year and a half worrying about surviving in a complex network of tunnels secretly constructed by the Reverend, while everyone else believed he was on a mission trip to Paraguay.

Fear not. Following are some thought-provoking sources which might help you navigate this overwhelming choice. As a part of the bunker-survivor rehabilitation program (BSRP), this pamphlet will serve as a means to get informed in a small amount of time.

Looking at opinion polls is a good place to see where the country stands. Naturally, bias is difficult to avoid, and partisan interests make discernment even harder. On top of this, you’re not particularly good at telling when someone is hiding their true intentions. This is how you got tricked into giving all your earthly possessions to the Temple of Underground Joy in exchange for the promise of salvation.

Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight has risen as the go-to source for conscientious, statistical data analysis. This website compiles data from numerous opinion polls, and judges their accuracy in an attempt to find some truth in numbers. In the 2008 elections, FiveThirtyEight accurately predicted the vote winner of all 50 states, which has

become their flagship claim to the accuracy of their methods. If this sounds confusing, don’t worry. Mild confusion and clouded judgement are side effects of the drugs you were given in the bunker to keep you compliant, but your body will absorb them within a few days.

By now, you might want to know these candidates personally, sort of how you knew Steph, the lifesize doll you built out of pillow stuffing to have someone to talk to.

PBS’s documentary “The Choice” chronicles the lives of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and sheds some light on what their motivations are in seeking the presidency. The New York Times praised the documentary’s narrative, calling it “sober, straightforward and presented without editorializing,”

and when it came to Donald Trump’s character, “quietly, firmly damning.”

In the few days leading up to the election, the 24-hour news networks will go berserk. Since your eyes are still extremely sensitive to light, you probably don’t want to stay tuned too long. Thankfully, the NPR Politics Podcast provides weekly roundups and daily breakdowns of the news in a conversational, digestible tone.

Hopefully, you are now better suited to reentering civil discourse as a newly informed citizen. This Tuesday, you can go out and cast your ballot for the future of America! As a warning, look out for rhetoric that reminds you of your days underground. Moral panic and paranoia is what got you into a cult in the first place. And we don’t want to end up back in the bunker.

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

17

A pre-obituary for Gary & Jill Nintendo Switch With the presidential election less than a week away and the aftermath of the three NABEEHA VIRANI presidential debates, the A&E WRITER world knows of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. However, there are two other candidates running for president: Jill Stein, and Gary Johnson.

Stein is the Green Party’s presidential nominee and Johnson is the Libertarian Party’s nominee.

Both candidates ran for president in 2012 under their respective parties.

Stein received around 400,000 votes while Johnson received around 1.3 million votes.

According to Stein’s website, her plan, called Power to the People, aims to create “deep system change, moving from the greed and exploitation of corporate capitalism to a human-centered economy that puts people, planet and peace over profit.” She wants to end police brutality and demilitarize the police, expand women’s and LGBTQ rights, protect the earth from climate change, increase minimum wage to $15/hour and create new jobs to end unemployment. Stein’s platform is similar to Bernie Sanders’, but really focuses on establishing Green Deals to protect and replenish the earth.

Johnson’s website calls him a “breath of fresh air.” Libertarians are known to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, so Johnson’s stance on policies reflect this definition. He wants to change the tax code, create new jobs, protect personal rights and

freedoms and make immigration safer and more advantageous to those entering the country for the first time.

Though both candidates seem similar, they have vastly different opinions on certain topics. Johnson is more conservative when compared to Stein on domestic issues such as expanding Obamacare and legalizing marijuana. He also advocates for gun rights and doesn’t think making voter registration easier is a good idea. Stein wants higher taxes for the wealthy and Johnson doesn’t, and Johnson wants to expand free trade while Stein doesn’t.

In terms of experience, Johnson was the governor of New Mexico from 1995 to 2003. Stein had not won an election for Massachusetts governor when she ran in 2002 and 2010. The only election she won was the Lexington Town Representative position, which she served in 2005 and was reelected in 2008.

Both Stein and Johnson have also been heckled by the media and citizens for some of the things they’ve said. Stein, as a physician and Harvard Medical School graduate, has made some interesting statements regarding the link between vaccinations and autism.

She stated that people have concerns on whether or not vaccines are linked to causing autism, taking her a while to give a clear answer on whether or not she was anti-vaccination. Just to be clear, she is not against vaccines.

Johnson was thrown under the bus for not knowing basic information about other countries and leaders.

When asked about the Syrian city, Aleppo, that’s facing horrific damage due to the civil war, Johnson

answered, “What is Aleppo?” When asked in another interview about which foreign leader he looks up to, Johnson said, “I guess I’m having another Aleppo moment,” joking to disguise the fact that he couldn’t think of a single foreign leader when asked to do so during that interview.

However different they are, both candidates agree that the two-party system of the United States just doesn’t cut it. They want to expand this system and allow third-party candidates to gain recognition.

They weren’t allowed to debate with Clinton and Trump because debate rules say that candidates need to hit 15 percent at national polls to participate. Currently, Johnson and Stein are under 10 percent.

Furthermore, Clinton, Johnson and Trump are on 50 states’ ballots, Stein on only 45.

Critics of the third-party argument state that there is no space for a third party within American politics.

Both major parties can and have taken in and adopted ideas of thirdparty candidates. Just look at what Clinton did with some of Sanders’ ideas. Furthermore, avid Clinton supporters argue that a vote for either Johnson or Stein is a vote for Trump. There are 270 votes needed to win the presidency. If, in some states, previous Sanders supporters cast their vote for Johnson or Stein, that could easily take away votes from Clinton and allow Trump to win that particular state.

Whether or not you agree with the current system, it’s important that you go out and vote so that your voice is heard, just like these third-party candidates are making themselves known.

The first look from Nintendo at their new gaming platform, t h e Nintendo MAX FREEMAN Switch, A&E WRITER promises a chance for gamers to return to their couches and rediscover local multiplayer gaming.

It’s been a while since people consistently played the same videogame, in the same room, on the same TV, while sitting on the same piece of furniture! People could ruthlessly taunt each other and get away with it because ten seconds later someone else would sit down, totally pwn everyone and become the new king of the couch.

The Nintendo Switch could fix this problem in couch gaming. It has two removable controllers that connect to one device, but different friends can bring their own controllers and access the same console, which can be a portable handheld or be linked to a TV and played on the couch — hence the ability to “switch” between mobile and stationary devices. It would make couch gaming more spontaneous and more natural.

In the announcement video, Nintendo presents its own perceptions of how the device will be used, but the actual release of the Switch isn’t due until March of 2017. The short trailer illustrated some of the ways that they intend and expect their new product to be used, and much of their depiction reflects the more organic version of couch gaming. Playing pickup and

some people want to take a break, Nintendo Switch is there to host an NBA 2K match. Hosting a party and looking for another activity to keep people entertained as they mingle, set up a casual “Mario Kart” race on the Switch. All of these examples possible without carrying around several autonomous controllers.

The greatest games that have brought people to participate in the kind of social interaction that couch gaming encompasses have come from a variety of genres: just look at the original “Halo” and “Call of Duty” releases, any of the “Mario Kart” games, the infinitely growing number of sports games like “Madden” and “NBA 2K,” the “Smash Bros” series and even Blizzard’s “Diablo” franchise. But now, the era of PC gaming combined with console’s moving much of their gaming content online has dominated, leaving the couches cold and the headphones warm.

Though the champion for couch gaming is making its way forward in the gaming industry, the Nintendo Switch isn’t necessarily going to reconquer the same old couch, but instead revolutionize the idea of playing videogames with three or four other people in the same room.

While the conventional couchgaming experience may be going obsolete, its future generation will be more compatible with a world filled with interruptions. One reason couch gaming yielded to the online world is because the latter offered a more convenient way to have fun with a video game and other people.

The Nintendo Switch makes couch gaming natural, giving it a fighting chance in the gaming industry.

HRC picks sides with STEM NHI NGUYEN, A&E INTERN In order to accommodate the shortage of qualified American employees in industrial fields, Hillary Clinton has proposed to give green cards to international students who have advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Despite its potential benefits for the national economy, the bill inadvertently causes new problems: it diminishes individual freedom to explore education, initiates the unequal distribution of high-quality STEM workforce in the U.S. and in other developing countries and creates imbalanced industrial-economic and socio-cultural developments.

Even though media has exposed some of the ugly sides of the U.S. (i.e. social inequality, political corruption or enduring discrimination), it is still an ideal place for foreign students to live. The high standard of living and fairly democratic atmosphere attract students to stay here after finishing their study. Green cards offer holders residency and other benefits, such as employment and health care insurance. In addition to the legal privileges, it has other symbolic meanings, suggesting a sign of reward or encouragement for one’s achievement. Its perks, therefore, magnetize a large amount of foreign students to pursue STEM majors and avoid trying non-

STEM subjects at the beginning of their college careers. However, such occurrence prevents personal exploration and lures international students to make possibly unfit long-term choices. The meaning of education and study abroad becomes career-oriented instead of stirring academic inquisition and adventure, not to mention the fact that foreign parents who want their kids to get American citizenship will pressure their children to follow STEM careers and ignore their personal interests. Individual passions and discovery are directly at stake if this policy gets passed.

The act of giving green cards to STEM advanced graduates may also have a toll on the broader economy.

The problem with retaining all foreign STEM candidates for the U.S. is that it would create an unequal global STEM workforce and widen the economic gap between the U.S. and other developing countries. This certainly helps America maintain its high ranking in the world economy, but that domination is precarious.

The global economic system is interconnected, and the collapse of one economy greatly affects the other economies.

Last but not least, the celebration of STEM graduates by giving them green cards instigates a culture of prioritizing industrial development over the humanities and arts and triggers early career specialization

that forces students to confine themselves within their professional boundaries. The lack of experience in various disciplines impedes STEM graduates’ understanding of perspectives, concern for social issues and insightful appreciation for arts. STEM fields and the humanities have gone hand-in-hand and have each supported growth of individuals and communities.

The imbalance of an international workforce in these two fields, I could imagine, would bring us back to the era of Industrial Revolution in the 1860s, in which the country was economically prosperous but morally rotten from the inside out.

As a sociology major from Vietnam, I think the green card is unfair for me and my other nonSTEM peers who have overcome language barriers and worked very hard for these reading and writingintensive majors. I believe that social and cultural enrichment should be as valued as industrial development.

International students are great resources for this because they can contribute to world heritage. The green card for STEM relabels the importance of academic fields and makes us feel as if our majors are not worthwhile. The policy also leaves out personal efforts and assesses individuals solely by their majors.

That said, I do not support this bill because it takes a toll on individual and socio-cultural development.

Election Day is November 8th!

Remember to exercise your civic duty at Alamo Stadium.

GEOS-1307 Geology and Environment of China

Enroll and learn about China its unique geology, resources and environments.

Satisfies Interdisciplinary cluster requirement of the Pathways Curriculum (Ecological Civilization in Asia).

Discussion topics will focus on the unique geological features of China, the resources, and the unique environmental challenges China faces as a result of rapid economic development.

Registration: Monday, Nov. 7 through Tuesday, Nov. 24.For more info: contact: Dan Lehrmann: dlehrmann@trinity.edu

18

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT

A written look at the video essay The YouTube video has been long maligned for being a worthless, stupefying form of media, guilty of dumbing down America one cat video at a time.

ALEJANDRO CARDONA I’m not here to fight the statement - Top A&E WRITER Ten videos and Let’s Plays may very well be the new opium of the people. But for those seeking depth and analysis in the digital universe, there is a new form of digital video on the rise.

You might have never heard the term “video essay,” but you’ve definitely seen a few. Many of the videos produced by Vox, NowThis, and Buzzfeed can be categorized as video essays.

The problem is that even creators struggle to define what exactly a video essay is.

Filmmaker Magazine recently compared video essays to pornography, being that, “as the saying goes, you know it when you see it.”

The brand of the video essay initially described the work of film aficionados who would recut footage from existing films, providing a fresh look, and sometimes producing a new film altogether. The supercut and fan remix are descendants of this kind of video essay.

The term is now being used to cover a much wider spectrum of content. Video essays can look like vlogs, animation, documentary, news, or something else entirely. They are a product decisively endemic to the digital environment, where any and all influences are welcome.

The only commonality seems to be a thesisdriven focus that aims to provide a critical look into a given topic. The only other requirements is that a creator be passionate about the subject —since there is no guarantee that the videos will result in any kind of revenue.

As their own researchers, writers, editors, narrators and producers, the currency of video essayists is their obsession. Lewis Bond, the movie supergeek behind Channel Criswell, travelled hundreds of miles and spent days poring over the materials at the Stanley Kubrick exhibit in the London, in preparation for a thirty-minute essay entitled “Stanley Kubrick - The Cinematic Experience.”

In many ways, the video essay is a symbol for the coming-of-age of online video. The first few years of any new medium are largely spent attempting to pull off products meant for other media—like how early television spent years imitating theater and radio.

Similarly, informational YouTube videos spent many years imitating documentaries and TV news pieces, but the medium has evolved into something entirely of itself.

Matching form to content - a prime directive for many essay creators—accounts in good measure for the unique style of the video essay.

When done right, no two video essays will be alike, since their look, pacing, structure, and overall tone will be dictated by their respective subject matter. many other formats in an attempt to find the best way to explore a topic.

“One of the most interesting things about this particular form is that there aren’t any rules,” said Max Winter, Editor-in-Chief of Press Play, in an interview for Filmmaker Magazine, “the video essayists tend to make up the rules as they go along.

This pursuit of uniqueness in each individual video stands in sharp contrast to film and television, media wherein rules and repetitive formulas are sought out as a way of lowering production costs. The rejection of systematization drove Evan Puschak, creator of “The Nerdwriter,” into the self-governed world of online video.

Before becoming the Nerdwriter fulltime, Puschak wrote and produced for “Seeker Daily,” a show for Discovery Digital Networks, until he abandoned the project to produce video essays on his own terms. In a Q&A video, he explained his reasons for leaving DDN. “The structures of producing one video a day means that everything had to be templetized,” says Puschak, “everything had to look the same every day, and we sort of slaughtered the script into this b-roll formula that wasn’t interesting to me.”

Part of what allows video essayists to follow their creative fixations is that they are often disconnected from any kind of business interests. Many high-subscriber essayists are crowdfunded by their subscribers, using Patreon, a service which allows patrons to donate an amount for each video released (with a monthly limit, to prevent abuse).

The Nerdwriter Patreon yields $3,337 dollars per video, and Tony Zhou’s “Every Frame a Painting” makes $6,913 dollars per video.

Patreon allows for upscaling, with some video essay channels essentially running a small video production business. Kurzgesagt, a German video-essay group, creates educational videos featuring slick, professional animation.

They currently receive $19,586 dollars each month, which helps fund their team of researchers, writers, and animators.

Video essayists are a valuable part of the online ecosystem. As liberated, crowdfunded auteurs, they are raising the bar for what we can expect of online video and their style is in turn influencing documentary and other media. So the next time a video essay pops up on your Facebook feed, take a moment to appreciate the creator’s tenacity and dedication. Or you could, you know, take a break and watch a few cat videos.

“Nerdwriter” and “Every Frame a Painting

I voted and now I don’t know what reality is

graphic by GRACE FRYE

I voted for Hillary Clinton because I’m paranoid. I voted for Hillary Clinton because I’m afraid.

I voted for Hillary Clinton because it was the right DYLAN WAGNER decision between A&E WRITER the two major candidates. But after I reviewed my ballot and pressed “Vote”—the only physical button on the all-touch display—my paranoia, my fear, did not go away. Because as much as I believe that the career politician with decades of experience and oodles of preparation will be a better president than a villain from “Back to the Future,” Trump has done damage to our system that opens up the doors for others like him. And here’s why.

Some of Trump’s appeal stems from his failed-Reagan-clone charisma, some from his verbal and physical brutality both on and off the debate stage. In the byzantine world of politics, where most of the grimy wheels are turned on a small scale and accomplishments only ring as loud as you scream them, someone experienced in drama will sink right into the fray, knowing that substance and accountability are just words used by pointyheaded intellectuals to hide their impotence.

Knowing what’s “real” to constituents is more important than staying moored in reality, and who in this election is more experienced with reality—albeit reality television—than Trump? He controls his image so well because he knows what he knew on “The Apprentice”: that he’s always being watched, and that the battle being fought is not always the same as the war being won.

I’m convinced that Trump’s aptitude for campaigning is inextricably linked with

his experience on television. In reality TV, there’s always a basket full of “types,” shells of characters like “the asshole,” “the dumb one,” “the innocent one,” etc., for the producers to fill with that season’s real-life suckers.

And since shows like “The Apprentice” stay popular due to their in-show bickering and fighting between candidates—excuse me, contestants—the winner is the person who can highlight and exploit the weaknesses of others before a live studio audience. Sound familiar yet? It should. When Trump dealt the death-blow to Jeb Bush in the primaries, Trump’s “low energy” jab acted as a doublebind—a verbal tactic that leaves the opponent to play a lose-lose game. If Jeb got excitable and defensive, he’s working within the “low energy” framework. If he doesn’t, the insult sticks on its face.

By exemplifying a candidate who knows that, superficially, politics have nothing to do with experience or knowledge and everything to do with exposure and viciousness, Trump stands to educate a new generation of politicians on the standard operating procedures regarding political candidacy.

As election day approaches, I’m reminded of (spoilers) a late scene in “The Dark Knight.”

As Batman stands over a prone Joker, the madman quips: “You didn’t think I’d risk losing the battle for Gotham’s soul in a fistfight with you? No. You need an ace in the hole.” For Trump, even if he loses he wins; his “rigged election” claims are doing wonders to unravel confidence in the government, just as his candidacy itself unravels the public’s confidence in our potential leaders. He’s been playing the long con for the entire process of the election.

A phenomenon like Trump, win or lose, does not arrive and leave without scarring the landscape. And that keeps me afraid.

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

Danny Brown’s new album JACOB ROSSITER A&E INTERN Detroit rapper Danny Brown exploded onto the scene in 2011 when he released his breakout album “XXX.” Brown had already garnered a certain amount of underground notoriety with his mixtape “The Hybrid,” in which he introduced the world to his signature highpitched voice and off-kilter delivery.

Two years later, he released “Old,” which, despite doing quite well both critically and commercially, detoured from the personal side of Danny that served to draw many listeners toward the artist in 2011.

Instead, Brown seemed to want to cater more so to the college-party crowd with such tracks as “Dip” and “Smokin and Drinkin.” Admittedly, the album as a whole was solid in its own right, but Danny lost a lot of the potential he displayed in “XXX.” Fast forward to 2016, and Danny Brown has dropped his arguably most ambitious project to date.

The first track, “Downward Spiral,” immediately sets the tone of the project, one in which Brown weaves a disturbing narrative of the artist at his lowest point in life. Brown’s lyrics are raw and visceral, painting a world filled with dope fiends, drug addiction and mental illness. These themes have always been present to in Brown’s music, but here they feel more genuine than ever before.

Brown, having already established himself as an artist willing and

capable of rapping over a wide range of beats, amps up that tradition here by choosing some of the most fascinatingly bizarre instrumentation and samples he’s ever worked with.

Take for example the next track on the album, “Tell Me What I Don’t Know.” A minute goes by before we hear any hint of percussion. For this track, Brown does away with his signature off the wall, high-pitched squawk in exchange for a more subdued murmur as he recounts the days of his childhood, when he was living in poverty day to day in Detroit: “One lane going wrong way ‘til I crash / Teacher find my sack, going nowhere fast … Tell me what I don’t know / Last night homie got killed at the liquor store.”

The track, “Rolling Stone” continues the theme of a “downward spiral” set up by the beginning of the album. On this song Brown opens up further about living with depression, paranoia and a whole slew of addictions. The track’s hook, performed by South African singer Petite Noir, references Bob Dylan’s “Like a Rolling Stone.” Even though Danny now has the means not only to survive and put food on his table, but live an incredibly lavish lifestyle as a rapper, he feels disconnected and totally alone, “like a rolling stone.”

The next track “Really Doe” serves as a breather of sorts. The song features Kendrick Lamar, Ab Soul and Earl Sweatshirt, all of whom hit it out of the park by bringing their own sound yet managing to play

off one another’s energy seamlessly.

One of Earl’s stand out lines being “Well it’s the left-handed shooter, Kyle Lowry the pump … I’m at your house like, “Why you got your couch on my Chucks?”

After “Really Doe,” we’re back to business as usual with the next three tracks, “Lost,” “Ain’t it Funny” and “Golddust.” With each subsequent track, Danny descends further into his drug addiction. Danny’s lyrics are anything but euphemistic, and his strengths lie in not holding anything back. His delivery matches the content of his lyrics. Danny has an incredible knack for altering the pitch and cadence of his voice, while somehow managing to stay on beat. The final chunk of the album takes a positive turn, as Brown starts to claw himself out of the rut he’s put himself in. The final track, “Hell for it” shows that Danny isn’t going down without a fight. Instead of wallowing in self-pity, Brown defiantly faces his problems and expresses hope for the future.

“Atrocity Exhibition” is best enjoyed if understood as a cohesive project. It is a clear artistic expression

by Danny, and feels incredibly honest. Not to appear pretentious, but some of the best tracks on the album, in my opinion, are so avantgarde and, quite frankly, “out there” that many people may be turned off. But for this I commend Danny Brown and am excited for what is yet to come from the promising Detroit rapper.

19

Apologies from Alex Until t h i s election I was still registered to vote in Harris County. It ALEX URI NEWS SECTION EDITOR wasn’t for any reason other than it forced me to go home and visit my family.

This year I decided to finally register to vote in Bexar County, the place that I have come to call home.

This is where my saga begins.

Over the summer, before I came back to school I sent in a request to the Office of the Secretary of State of Texas to get a form to change my address. By family weekend my form had come in the mail and was hand delivered by my parents. The form then promptly sat on my desk for at least a week.

When I finally took the time to fill out my information I was getting close to the form’s deadline. I hastily wrote in my information, drove to the post office and began to wait for my new voter registration certificate.

The week turned into a month and I still didn’t have the certificate that would give me the green light to cast my vote. I began to research who all was running in Bexar County in preparation for the big day.

As early voting quickly approached I started religiously checking my mailbox hoping my card had come in so I could stop worrying about it.

! ! and Tuesday Monday

When my mailbox wouldn’t give the answers I needed I started checking my registration online.

Much to my surprise I was still registered in Harris County.

My mind immediately jumped to the six-hour drive I would have to make to have my voice heard in such a critical election. In a last ditch effort I made a call to the Secretary of State of Texas to see if it was in fact too late to do anything about it.

The man who answered my call reassured me that I would in fact be able to vote and that all I needed to do was call the Bexar County Elections Department and they would help me sort it out.

I called into the county and they informed me that there was a problem with my address on the form and that I needed to come in to their main office.

I made the drive to the office and was told I had to re-fill out the form.

When I asked if the form would be ready my Nov. 8 the woman behind the counter looked at me as if I had asked if the sky was maroon.

I was told that I could vote on a limited ballot right then and there or risk not voting at all. Images of a country run by Donald Trump flashed before my eyes and I made the quick decision to vote on a limited ballot.

I may not have made a huge difference in Bexar County politics but if our country isn’t in ashes in the next year you have me and my limited ballot vote to thank.

Order your Trinity November 7 and 8 Ring!

10am - 3pm Coates University Center Lobby !

Monday and Tuesday November 7 and 8 10am - 3pm Coates University Center Lobby!

Sports

The Political Athlete

A common claim is that apolitical entities, sports included, have become more politicized, especially during the current polarized, opinion-summoning election. This could very well be true, but it’s not as if politics and sports have ever really been separate. In 1940, legendary pitcher Walter Johnson ran for a seat in the Maryland congressional race, and although he lost, he can serve as a testament to those Americans who find it affirming to decry America’s “overwhleming obsession with politics.” For decades, athletes have used the realm of politics and vice versa for personal and public good. It’s nothing new.

Men’s basketball shooting for SCAC championship in upcoming season

BY CHRIS GARCIA

SPORTS REPORTER

Following a long and productive off-season, the Trinity men’s basketball season is almost here. On November 15th, the team will play their first game on the road versus the University of Texas at Dallas. The Tigers were able to finish strong last year, winning their last 4 of 6 games to close out the season. They hope to improve on the 10-16 record from last year, and have their sights set on a SCAC Championship.

With ten juniors and seniors returning to the roster, the Tigers’ experience could be their biggest asset. These upperclassmen are hungry for a conference title and are optimistic that their hard work the last few months will pay off come game time. The heartbreaking quarterfinal loss to Centenary in last year’s SCAC tournament has not been forgotten, with a score of 57-55. That loss has served to motivate the Tigers, with the returners on this team ready and willing to do everything in their power to ensure that they finish at the top of the SCAC, and receive an opportunity to play in the NCAA tournament.

One the Tiger’s best offensive players last year was junior forward A.J. Pulliam, who is hoping to build on a standout season. Averaging 13.9 points per game, 4th in scoring among all SCAC players, he was able to play a major role in coach Cunningham’s offensive scheme. Born in Bryan, Texas, he was not just a force on offense, but he also grabbed a team high 7 rebounds on the three separate occasions. With a 50% field goal percentage, strong rebounding skills and an ability to hit from the three point range when necessary, Pulliam looks to be a major factor over the next few months.

“We’ve made several changes to our playing style this year both with offensive and defensive strategies, as well several players in roles they may not have expected coming into the year. I think this is going to be great for our team this year, but also makes it very hard to have strong expectations. Nonetheless, I’m positive we have the talent and are taking the right steps to win conference this year, which is always a huge focus for us coming into each year,” Pulliam said.

Fellow upperclassman, junior forward Brian Blum, is poised for a big improvement as well. Blum is excited about this season and feels that the chemistry on this team will be conducive to achieving a winning record. “[We’re hoping] to continue improving as a team, for starters.

We’ve got a group of guys who’ve been together for a couple of years now and it’s exciting to see what we can do this year.

We’re a pretty tight knit group. Everyone’s pretty committed to the same goals, and it shows on the court Hopefully that results in a conference championship and a little beyond, Blum said ” After 17 seasons at the helm, coach Pat Cunningham feels that this year’s team could really accomplish something special.

Although he was disappointed with the way last year went, he drew many positives from an otherwise seemingly down season.

“The expectation every year is to win conference. That is what is going to put us in the tournament and allow us to compete for a championship. Every guy on the team has the mindset that

Following a 10-16 season this past year, the men’s basketball team believes that they are poised for a big improvement. Pictured above, junior guard Matt Jones flies in uncontested for a lay-up. Senior forward AJ Pulliam posts up in the bottom photo.

FILE PHOTOS

we can beat anybody. Although last year was tough, each year you have a fresh set of guys that are just as hungry as the ones who played last year, and our mixture of upperclassmen and young guys is going to make for some great energy, Cunningham said”

This year’s mix of newcomers and upperclassmen should offer plenty of highlights and great games. Look for them to bounce back from a disappointing season with a season sure to stacked full of intrigue.

Alongside Collins is former figure skater Michelle Kwan, who has worked with Clinton in the past and has a strong history of being a Democrat. Former soccer player, and the holder of the world record for most international goals, Abby Wambach has also thrown her support behind Clinton and has attended multiple rallies in support for her.

In support of “Making America Great Again” comes notably Terry Bollea, better known as Hulk Hogan, a former professional wrestler who loves Donald Trump. In August Hogan even went as far to say that he would like to be Trump’s running mate. He believes that America needs a president that will shake things up.

Unsurprisingly, professional golfer and long-time friend of Trump, John Daly, has also decided to go public with his political opinions. Calling Donald Trump “one of the great humans beings I’ve met in my life,” Daly is a strong believer in this country being run by businessmen instead of politicians.

Not all long-time friends of Trump have fully jumped on board with his presidency. Tom Brady has been known for

his nearly 14-year friendship with Trump, but has been fairly iffy on directly endorsing him. At first, Brady seemed to be pro-Trump, touting a “Make America Great Again” hat in his locker and saying that he thought a Trump presidency would be “great.”

That, however, was before Trump began spouting some of his more inflammatory comments. Since then, Brady has seemed to be far more hesitant to endorse the man, and has somewhat withdrawn his previous statement, claiming it was an offhand comment and he was still undecided on how to vote. Brady has further declined to answer questions on how he feels about Trump’s “locker room talk.”

Beyond just Trump and Clinton, some athletes have stepped outside of the two-party system to endorse a third party candidate. MMA fighter Ronda Rousey has long been against both Trump and Clinton, especially after Trump’s less-thannice tweets about her. While she has failed to directly endorse a candidate, she said that if Bernie Sanders was not on the ballot, she would be voting third-party.

Professional athletes choose their party

BY HALEY McFADDEN

SPORTS REPORTER

The 2016 election cycle has shown to be incredibly divisive, and it seems like politics are seeping into more and more aspects of our everyday life. While some people seem to get mad when their favorite athletes show that they have political opinions, that has not stopped multiple players across all sports from using their media power to endorse a certain candidate.

Within the past year, more and more athletes have stepped to help their favorite candidates, whether that be Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or a third-party option, get more attention and hopefully, more votes.

Among the people standing up to say “I’m with her” is Jason Collins, who is probably most well known for the being the first openly gay player in the NBA. Aside from just an appreciation of Clinton’s policies, Collins has been a long-time friend of Chelsea Clinton, and claims that the Clintons helped him accept his sexuality back in his collegiate years.

SPORTS • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

21

When sports superstars chase ghosts; how the greats motivate themselves In 1981, John McEnroe defeated Bjorn Borg for the US Open championship. It was the 14th time the two tennis players had battled, and McEnroe’s victory split the series at 7 to 7.

The two young men were undoubtedly the best in the business, with gloriously bright futures ahead if

BY MARKHAM SIGLER they chose to honor their SPORTS EDITOR hard work and talent. But they didn’t. Borg walked out of the stadium that day before the award ceremony even commenced, never played another major and was completely out of the game within a few months. And McEnroe? “The Ringer” founder Bill Simmons wrote about a conversation he recently had with McEnroe, and what do you think they talked about? Borg. Over 35 years later, and McEnroe hadn’t let go of Borg’s premature departure. Whether Borg quit because of recurring injuries a damaged ego, or a deadly combination of the two, is irrelevant to the fact that McEnroe desperately wanted—needed—Borg to fuel his desire to compete at the highest level possible. To give his soul to the game. Without Borg, a piece of McEnroe vanished into the fascinating world of sports “what-ifs.” He coasted through the next few years, winning far less than a man of his abilities should’ve, and as Simmons puts it, “By 1985, he was kicking back in Malibu with his new girlfriend, wondering why he didn’t feel like playing tennis anymore.” He took that year off, and he’d never win another major.

This phenomenon plays a huge role in the motivation of each sports’ true greats. When an athlete’s at the top of their sports mountain, and they look around and can’t find a peer at their level—someone who offers a real challenge—the inescapable

question of “why I do what I do” raises its everlasting, ugly head. I think it’s safe to say that in team sports in addition to individual sports, the self must come first, at least at the end of the day. It’s human nature. Legends like Peyton Manning, Magic Johnson, Tiger Woods and Roger Federer certainly credit, trust and love their closest teammates, coaches and support system, and will acknowledge them as instrumental to their individual success until the day they die. But what pushed these men to achieve at a staggering rate? Was it merely a flimsy, fluctuating affection for the game they played, and the men they played with? Or was it a compulstion to give the sport their all because of their enviable situation? Somehow I doubt that. What you see more and more, as you study the greats’ answers, reflections and tireless work ethics, is people like Manning, Johnson, Federer and Woods who fought for, and ultimately craved total dominance of their game’s landscape.

For Manning it was always a present challenger, Tom Brady.

For Magic it was also a peer, Larry Bird. Federer and Woods spent much of the latter part of their careers chasing legends, Pete Sampras and Jack Nicklaus respectively, in pursuit of the total majors record. Frank Ocean put it bluntly when he said, “I’m about being the best.” That means training, playing and striving for that position on the timeless totem pole that you want to define you, forever.

There is perhaps no better example to explain this invisible yet unavoidable mindset’s makeup than the most shocking retirement of all time, Michael Jordan in 1993. The truest of the GOAT’s, Jordan, and his Chicago Bulls pulled off the first three peat in NBA history from ’90-’93. The man was the unapologetic epitome of sport’s superiority. The way he owned the court was unparalleled — not only in his time, but ever.

And it seems, after that third ring, there was nothing left to prove — nothing left to chase. So he quit, and tried to pick up professional baseball on the fly Tim Tebow style. It didn’t go so well. He struggled to eclipse the Mendoza Line in minor league ball for a couple seasons, decided his ego had taken

enough of a beating, rejoined the Bulls in time for the playoffs of the ’94-’95 season, and the rest… is history. The young, upstart Orlando Magic with a massive, incredibly gifted center named Shaquille O’Neal and yesteryear’s Derrick Rose, Penny Hardaway, defeated the Bulls in the playoffs. Embarrassed, furious and now properly fueled, Jordan reeled off three more decisive finals victories before retiring for the second time, and if not for the conflicting natures of his insatiable ego and deteriorating body, his magnificent story could’ve ended there.

When Jordan was left to question his purpose within the realm of basketball post-early ‘90s dominance, he found there was none. He had accomplished everything he had imagined as a hungry, aspiring youth. There no longer remained a viable obstacle to his quest for greatness. There was no Borg left to push him. Only when he practically created a situation in which he would fail, was he left with a renewed hunger to compete.

LeBron James is the latest manifestation of the chase for greatness. He’s made seven consecutive finals, and won three of the past five. He’s the reigning undisputed best of the best athletes in their respective sport — he emits a steady, unwavering sense of power and confidence when he’s interviewed that others simply can’t muster, because he’s the best and he knows it, and everyone else know it too. This past year he fulfilled his promise, and redeemed the city of Cleveland in storybook, too-good-to-be-true fashion. It was awesome.

There are no more mountains in the modern NBA for the King to climb, no more peers that can truly challenge his position as the man. In an awkward way, Kevin Durant and Steph Curry’s new partnership supports his claim to the throne.

They are no longer what drives him. At the annual Nike Skills Challenge five weeks after the finals, a camper asked LeBron what motivates him. A simple question, deserving of a simple answer. “My motivation, is the ghost I’m chasing. The ghost played in Chicago.”

Religion Courses Offered Spring 2017

Why the Study of Religion Matters “If I went back to college today, I think I would probably major in comparative religion, because that’s how integrated it is in everything that we are working on and deciding and thinking about in life today.” –Secretary of State John Kerry

RELI-1330 Asian Religions TR 8:30AM-9:45AM RELI-1360 Religion in the United States MWF 9:30AM-10:20AM MWF 10:30AM-11:20AM RELI-2354 The Hebrew Bible/Old Testament TR 8:30AM-9:45AM

TR 9:55AM-11:10AM

RELI-2355 The New Testament MWF 1:30PM-2:20PM RELI-2356 The Qur’an

TR 2:10PM-3:25PM

TR 12:45PM-2:00PM

RELI-2400 What is Religion?

MW 2:30PM-3:45PM

MW 3:55PM-5:10PM

RELI-3403 Death and Beyond TR 12:45PM-2:00PM RELI-3433 Chinese Religions

TR 11:20AM-12:35PM

RELI-3442 Global Christianities MW 2:30PM-3:45PM RELI-3455 Christianity Beyond the Canon TR 9:55AM-11:10AM RELI-3457 Jerusalem W 4:30PM-7:25PM RELI-3491 The Saint-Soldier: Exploring the Sikh Tradition TR 2:10PM-3:25PM

22

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 •

SPORTS

Trinty athletics increase usage of What does it mean social media with varying effect

BY HALEY McFADDEN SPORTS REPORTER

In an age where social media has become extremely widespread, many athletic programs are catching onto the trend and creating social media accounts of their own. At institutions of higher learning like Trinity University, the primary goal of these accounts is to gain attention from possible recruits, with side goals of keeping family and friends updated on events, as well as attracting attention from other students.

“I think the primary goal of most social media accounts would be to draw attention of recruits,” said former athletic department student worker Natalie Belew. “The idea being that now that so many kids have Instagram and Facebook and Twitter accounts, if schools have them students will see everything posted and get excited.

Belew also spoke to the benefits of involving student athletes’ parents.

“One thing I’ve noticed is that parents seem to enjoy it just as much if not more. It’s really easy for a parent to follow their kid’s team on social

media and stay updated on what’s going on, which is nice for them, especially considering that many kids do not talk to their parents as much in college,” said Belew.

However, there is some debate over whether or not the social media is actually effective in recruitment or if it only helps parents and other Trinity students. While many incoming recruits may see the social media pages, whether or not it affects their school decision is debatable.

“I did look at the cross country Facebook page and such before I decided to come here, but I would not say it actually made me want to come here more,” said first-year Laura Taylor. “I think that as far as athletics go, I knew I wanted to continue on in college so I did not need a social media site to persuade me in one way, which is probably a common thread among athletes.

Most probably just look at the sites to see what the team is like or to get an idea who they’ll be playing with, but not to help them make their decision on whether or not they want to play.”

Beyond just the effectiveness of the individual team’s social media pages, some athletes may

feel like their sport does not get equal coverage on the athletic department’s social media pages.

While big-name sports such as football, baseball and soccer have more of a following than sports like cross country or diving, those athletes may feel left out.

“A lot of the times I think there is some unequal coverage of sports on the athletic site, so the individual social media sites may feel like they have to post more to make up for it or feel like, since the athletic department is giving them less buzz, they have to generate some by posting a lot more than average,” said junior Melissa Whitman. “I understand that football is a really big deal in Texas, but Trinity has a lot of sports that all do really well.”

Since the explosion of Trinity University’s athletic usage of social media is fairly new, it is yet to be seen if there will actually be any noticeable impact of recruitment. However, thus far, it has served as a good way for future students to get a better idea on what they will be doing, and has especially helped friends and parents stay up-todate with the individual team’s activities.

to you to be able to vote?

Ariana Martinez, Junior “It means I get to participate in the democratic system.”

Jessica Rodriguez, Senior “It gives Americans the power to choose who will lead.”

Kelsey Osbourn, Sophomore “It’s my first year to vote, so it’s really exciting!” graphic by TYLER HERRON

United States of the Chicago Cubs The last World Series game to be played by the Chicago Cubs was in 1945, right after the end of World War II. It was that year that, according ELISE HESTER to baseball legend, SPORTS CONTRIBUTOR tavern owner William Sianis, cursed the Chicago Cubs for not letting his goa,t Murphy, attend Game 4 of the World Series at Wrigley Field.

Due to the billy goat’s odor, Sianis and his hooved friend were, depending on who you ask, either prevented entry at the ticket booth, removed by ushers or kicked out by club owner P.K. Wrigley himself. In anger, Sianis cursed the Chicago team, thus beginning The Curse of the Billy Goat. In the 71 years since the curse began, until the Chicago team won their pennant last week, the Cubs had never returned to play in the World Series, a championship they last won in 1908.

I am not going to pretend I ever cared about the Cubs before this season. I will

not delude you into thinking that I grew up watching baseball or that I am an authority on the subject. I like baseball, but I know little beyond the basic rules of the game, the names of the teams and that Trinity is really good.

I did not know the Cubs were even having a good season until a few weeks ago. I did not know the difference between a ball and a strike until March of 2015 when I was forcefully enlisted to join my high school softball team.

It would have made a lot more sense for my fellow sports reporter and actual, legit baseball player, Chris Garcia, to write about the World Series, but I wanted to write about this because I have a hunger to learn more.

I also saw a story of collective and personal human emotion, which is the kind of sports story I hope to spend my life telling through film. Forget bullpens and batting averages, this is a historical moment with the power to momentarily unite a nation.

In and of itself, baseball is just a game. The players and the fans are the ones who gave meaning and significance to the shutouts and grand slams of this year’s series. In this historical World Series, underdog triumph and unexpected victory were an idea behind which Americans rallied, because unlike in

this current election, the desired outcome of the World Series was clear and unifying. The Chicago Cubs presented a shared ideology in the marketable, tangible form of a major league baseball team. For this past week, when it came to baseball, we were all on the same side. The uniting desire for rectification, perseverance and victory after struggle is not limited to baseball. Baseball is many things to many people. For some it is a passion, for others a boring sport their grandfather cares about, but for many this past week, in some small wayk, a baseball game came to represent hope.

Inning by inning Americans clung to the hope that maybe, for just one day, the headlines would be about a broken curse instead of deleted emails and grabbing genitalia. A team winning the World Series after a century-long drought is a story America wanted and needed, more than ever before. There in the pastime of our past, we finally found something that everyone — outside of Cleveland — could get behind. Throughout the series, the eyes of the nation were fixed on the Chicago Cubs, and for one moment we put aside our many differences and agreed on one simple thing: “If they don’t win it’s a shame.”

Julia Weis, Sophomore “I only recently became an American citizen so it means a lot t obe able to use my rights.”

Stephen Chang, Junior “It’s important, but of lot of times it feels like it’s almost just to make me feel better, because a lot of times it doesn’t really make much of a difference.”

ADVERTISEMENTS • NOVEMBER 04, 2016 • WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM

EXPERIENCE MATTERS! When one decision can change the life of your neighbor or family member, experience matters.

23

NORMA GONZALES Years Practicing Law

OPPONENT

32

14

Cases Handled in Bexar County

1745

218

Jury Trials in Bexar County

OVER 100

0

YES

NO

Practicing Family Law

Dear Neighbors, For over 31 years I have practiced trial law in San Antonio and over 40 surrounding counties. My career started as an Assistant District Attorney and I went on to practice civil law. For over 20 years, I have been practicing family law and advocating for families in Bexar County and surrounding counties.

My experience with family law is essential to the position I am seeking. The 131st District Court hears family law cases every day - and you need a judge who understands the law. I am the only candidate for this bench who practices family law.

Unlike my opponent, who serves as inside counsel for a company, I serve children, mothers, fathers and grandparents from all over Bexar County. I have the right experience to sit on the bench of the 131st District Court. I have tried over 100 jury trials and handled more than 1,700 cases.

I understand the issues facing the court every day.

Hey Tigers! It is time to GET OUT THE VOTE. I am endorsing Norma Gonzales who is not only my step mother and a huge role model in my life but is also by far the most experienced candidate.

Experience Matters!

Leigh Anna Logsdon – Class of 2013

Pol. Ad. Paid for by Norma Gonzales for Judge Campaign, Margaret Mireles, Treasurer, P.O. Box 15342, San Antonio, Texas 78212

24

WWW.TRINITONIAN.COM • NOVEMBER 04 , 2016 •

ADVERTISEMENTS

Together We Go Far

Hey Tigers!

HOPE Hall members will go door to door on November 9th at 8pm collecting donations to benefit the people served by United Way programs

This year President Anderson will match all donations and Vice President Sheryl Tynes will match up to $750!

You can also donate at: