The Tufts Daily - Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

VOLUME LXXXIV, ISSUE 10

MEDFORD/SOMERVILLE, MASS.

LOCAL

Public safety, immigrants’ rights on the ballot with Question 4

by Aditya Acharya News Editor

GRACE ROTERMUND / THE TUFTS DAILY

Medford City Hall is pictured on March 12, 2021.

UNIVERSITY

Contributing Writer

Leading up to the midterm elections, Tufts political groups have organized across campus, urging their peers to head to the voting booths.

Tufts Democrats has been canvassing for a variety of causes, including “Yes on 1” which would apply a 4% surtax on personal income exceeding $1 million annually, and “Yes on 4” which would allow state residents to obtain driver’s licenses regardless of immigration status.

In addition, Tufts Democrats has been phone banking, holding discussions about the midterms and collaborating with other chapters of college Democrats for their canvassing initiatives. Tufts Republicans declined to comment on their midterms activities.

Mark Lannigan, the president of Tufts Democrats, is optimistic that the Democrats can turn out in substantial numbers on Nov. 8. He points to relative-

see LICENSE, page 2

LOCAL

Student groups organize around midterm elections

by Hannah Cox

This election day, Massachusetts voters will determine on the fate of a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses. On Nov. 8, Question 4 will ask voters to either accept or reject the Work and Family Mobility Act, a state law passed in June which would allow undocumented Massachussetts residents to apply for driver’s licenses, effective July 2023.

State representatives Christine Barber, Patricia Jehlen, Paul Donato, Sean Garballey, Mike Connolly and Erika Uyterhoeven — who represent Somerville, Medford and West Medford — have publicly advocated

for a “Yes” vote, which would affirm the Work and Family Mobility Act. “This was my bill,” Barber told the Daily. “I was a sponsor, worked on it for about four years … It was signed into law in June. The governor actually vetoed it and we overrode the veto in the House and Senate.”

Although the bill passed the Massachusetts State Legislature, the activist group Fair and Secure MA pushed to put the law on the ballot for a referendum. The group’s website claims Question 4 will increase undocumented immigration to the state and increase the likelihood of voter fraud.

Rep. Uyterhoeven, who represents part of Somerville, described

Somerville School Committee, city councilors endorse millionaire tax ballot question

ly high early vote totals and an increase in voter participation in recent years.

“What’s really been inspiring has been youth turnout, which we’ve seen increase pretty astronomically since 2016 and even 2018 and 2020,” Lannigan told the Daily. “Youth turnout has always been on the rise, and it’s continuing to be on the rise now.”

Lannigan also notes that emotionally charged issues like abortion provide reasons to be hopeful that people will vote in these midterms.

“What a lot of our membership is concerned about is what would happen if Congress flips to a very radical Republican party that has already said that they would support a national abortion ban [and] that would look into overturning the election,” Lannigan said. “I think the Supreme Court [and] abortion have been really scary issue areas that people have been motivatsee ORGANIZE, page 2

by Evelyn Altschuler

Executive Newsletter Editor

The Somerville School Committee has unanimously endorsed voting “Yes” on Question 1, a ballot initiative proposing the Fair Share Amendment. If passed, the Fair Share Amendment would apply to Massachusetts residents whose annual household income is above $1 million. The so-called “millionaire’s tax” would impose an additional 4% income tax on income above $1 million.

Raise Up Massachusetts, an organization that pushes for higher wages and expanded social services for the working class, proposed the Fair Share Amendment to the Massachusetts state legislature.

The amendment was subsequently approved and added as a ballot question for Massachusetts voters in the upcoming midterm elections.

“For years, the highest-income households in Massachusetts – those in the top 1 percent –

NICOLE GARAY / THE TUFTS DAILY

A Somerville ballot drop box is pictured on Powder House Boulevard on Sept. 28, 2020. have paid a smaller share of their income in state and local taxes than any other income group,” Raise Up Massachusetts states on their website.

According to the Tisch College’s Center for State Policy Analysis, the millionaire’s tax would affect about 0.6% of Massachussetts households. The cSPA predicts the tax would raise about $1.3 billion in 2023. All money raised

FEATURES

ARTS

OPINION

page 4

page 9

page 11

On conservatism, open dialogues could be the right move

‘The School for Good and Evil’ captures hearts of fairytale fanatics

Diminishing debates damage political discourse

by the tax would be reserved specifically for public education and the maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation.

“The Fair Share Amendment would finally move MA towards a more fair tax structure where the very richest top 0.6% pay a 9% rate on all of their income over $1 million per year to fund public see MILLIONAIRES, page 3 NEWS

1

FEATURES

4

ARTS & POP CULTURE

9

FUN & GAMES

10

OPINION

11

SPORTS

BACK

2

THE TUFTS DAILY | News | Tuesday, November 8, 2022

THE TUFTS DAILY Chloe Courtney Bohl Editor in Chief

–

EDITORIAL

–

Delaney Clarke Julia Shannon-Grillo Managing Editors

Ty Blitstein Abigail Vixama Associate Editors Emily Thompson Aaron Gruen Ariana Phillips Madeline Wilson Aditya Acharya Madeleine Aitken Coco Arcand Peri Barest Olivia Field Skyler Goldberg Ella Kamm Maddy Mueller Michael Weiskopf Ava Autry Charlotte Chen Daniel Vos

Executive News Editor Deputy News Editors

Mark Choi Sam Dieringer Kaitlyn Wells Owen Bonk Jillian Collins Katie Furey Kendall Roberts Sam Russo Kate Seklir Tobias Fu Isabelle Kaminsky Maya Katz Layla Kennington Elizabeth Zacks

Executive Features Editor Deputy Features Editors

Jack Clohisy RaiAnn Bu Henry Chandonnet Ellie Lester Siavash Raissi Carl Svahn Emmy Wenstrup Blake Anderson Alexis Enderle Odessa Gaines Ryan Fairfield Nate Hall Reya Kumar Daniel Chung Idil Kolabas Gian Luca Di Lenardo Henry Murray Kristin Shiuey

News Editors

Assistant News Editors

Features Editors

Assistant Features Editors

Executive Arts Editor Arts Editors

Assistant Arts Editors

Executive Opinion Editor Deputy Opinion Editor Opinion Editors

Alexander Janoff Editorial Editor Brendan Hartnett Editorialists Makenna Law Julian Perry Faye Thijssen Marianna Schantz Keila McCabe Arielle Weinstein Oliver Fox Ethan Grubelich Arnav Sacheti Bharat Singh Sam Dieringer Henry Gorelik Timothy Valk Michael Wallace-Bruce

Executive Sports Editor Deputy Sports Editor Sports Editors

Assistant Sports Editors

Flora Meng Executive Science Editor Peri Barest Science Editors Avery Hanna Yanqing Huang Ian Lau Emilia Nathan Sarah Sandlow Chris Tomo Cindy Zhang

Aaron Klein Executive Audio Producer Natalie Brownsell Executive Photo Editors Ian Lau Julia Carpi Executive Video Editor Odessa Gaines Intentionality & Inclusivity Avery Hanna Committee Chairs Skyler Goldberg Education Committee Chair Madeleine Aitken Social Committee Chairs Mariel Priven

PRODUCTION

–

Charlene Tsai Production Director Maddy Noah Executive Layout Editors Mike Kourkoulakos Paavani Agrawal Layout Editors Max Antonini Brooke Chomko Alexa Hopwood Olivia Leviss Meghna Singha Olivia White Avril Lynch Executive Graphics Editors Camilla Samuel Rachel Liu Executive Copy Editors Christopher Vergos Aedan Brown Copy Editors Sophie Dorf-Kamienny Marlee Stout Lucy Belknap Assistant Copy Editors Julieta Grané Merry Jiao George McGurkin Maddy Mueller Isabel Overby Liz Buehl Executive Social Media Caroline Vandis Managers Evelyn Altschuler Executive Newsletter Editor

–

BUSINESS

–

Sam Berman Business Director Michelle Alizada Ad Managers Izzy Francis Erika Kim Receivables Manager Ryan Sorbi Kendall Roberts Alumni Liaisons Kate Seklir

Contact Us P.O. Box 53018, Medford, MA 02155

Tufts Dems, cSPA weigh in on Ballot Question 4 LICENSE

continued from page 1 the overwhelming support for a “Yes” vote from her constituents.

“I have knocked thousands of doors and spoken with hundreds of my constituents about this ballot question, I have yet to meet a constituent planning to vote no on Question 4,” she wrote in an email to the Daily.

Barber explained that the main surprise for Massachusetts voters was that the question was put on the ballot.

“People don’t know it’s on the ballot because it was a last-minute addition,” Barber said. “Once people know it’s on the ballot, they are supportive, especially with hearing about it from a public safety lens.”

A recent UMass Amherst/WCVB poll found that 51% of voters plan to vote “Yes” on Question 4, with 39% planning to vote “No” and 10% undecided.

Among those opposed to the bill is Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl; his opponent, Maura Healey, supports the bill.

In an op-ed for The Somerville Times, Barber, Jehlen, Donato, Garballey, Connolly and

Uyterhoeven, underscored the law’s public safety importance and the support it has garnered from local law enforcement.

“Yes on 4 has overwhelming support from law enforcement, including Somerville and Medford Chiefs of Police, Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan and Sheriff Peter Koutoujian,” they wrote in the op-ed. “They understand that our roads are safer with more licensed drivers … ensuring that every Massachusetts driver has fulfilled our state’s testing, training, and insurance requirements.”

The op-ed cites the adoption of similar laws by 16 other states, including Connecticut, New York and Vermont.

“We’ve seen impressive results, including a 9% decrease in hit and run accidents in Connecticut, and an 80% decrease in the rate of uninsured drivers in Utah,” the op-ed states. “With more insured drivers on the road, the cost of auto insurance drops for all drivers.”

In addition to improvements in public safety, the op-ed cites an estimated expansion of the state economy by $11 million in the first three years of the law’s implementation

from taxes and license fees, plus vehicle registration and inspection.

Barber noted that since the law would not go into effect until next year, there is time to plan some of the logistics of its implementation.

“People don’t actually start getting their licenses until July of 2023 and that’s because there are things the [Registry of Motor Vehicles] has to do to get ready,” she said.

Mark Lannigan, president of Tufts Democrats and a member of the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee, said Question 4 pertains to immigrant justice.

He noted the recent transport of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is an example of the increased national attention to immigrants’ rights issues.

“There’s a lot of bureaucratic red tape that people have to go through all the time that needs forms of ID, and it is a more valid form of ID … to have a driver’s license,” Lannigan said. “People need to get places. They should be able to have access to a car if they need one.”

Rep. Barber cited beliefs about federal immigration policy as a

primary reason for opposition to a “Yes” vote.

“There are some who talk about federal immigration policy, and what I say to that is this isn’t about [that],” Barber said. “There’s lots of challenges with federal immigration policy, [but] this is really about the state’s role in who drives and who doesn’t. That’s a state policy.”

The Center for State Policy Analysis at the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life released a report in October on the potential impacts and implications of Question 4. The report, written by cSPA’s Executive Director Evan Horowitz, concluded that passing the ballot question could increase the number of law-abiding drivers and “offer some new legitimacy to unauthorized immigrants.”

However, the law could also pose a risk to undocumented immigrants if a federal administration seeks RMV records in an effort to track them down.

“Question 4 lets voters decide where driver’s licenses fit in this broader picture, weighing issues like the safety of our transportation system and the impact on immigrants’ daily lives,” the cSPA report states.

Tufts campus abuzz with student organizers ORGANIZE

Ethan Steinberg Investigative Editor

–

tuftsdaily.com

Please rec ycle this

continued from page 1 ed by to make sure [Democrats] maintain a majority.”

Tufts J Street U, which supports a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, has endorsed a slate of anti-occupation candidates for the midterms and hosted phone and text banks to garner support for their candidates.

Junior Violet Kopp, a co-chair of Tufts J Street U, urged students to vote in the midterms.

“Elections can feel really draining [and] removed and bureaucratic and frustrating, but think about abortion rights,” Kopp said in an interview with the Daily. “This country is looking really dangerous right now, and it could really easily flip and take a turn in the direction that we don’t want it to go down. If your vote is one thing that even might affect [the outcome], you might as well do it.”

J Street U’s candidate slate, titled “4-in-4,” highlights their goal to elect four candidates in the four weeks before the election. According to Kopp, J Street took each candidates’ entire agenda into consideration during the section process.

“We support these candidates as [an] anti-occupation club because they’re anti-occupation, but they’re also pro-abortion and pro-gun control and they believe in climate justice,” Kopp said. “For so many people, there’s something to get behind about these candidates.”

Kopp elaborated on J Street’s holistic evaluation of candidates.

“While our focus is IsraelPalestine, we recognize the intersectionality of issues and know that … the way that we do peaceful and just and demilita-

BOWIE BELLO / THE TUFTS DAILY

An informational postcard and packet about the 2022 midterm elections are pictured in Barnum Hall, home of the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life, on Oct. 30. rized diplomacy is so related to gun violence prevention, and to ending police brutality and to climate justice,” Kopp said.

Neelan Martin, a sophomore member of Tufts Young Democratic Socialists of America, expressed enthusiasm about YDSA’s organizing efforts with a focus on local issues.

Martin pointed out that while this is YDSA’s first full year as a TCU recognized club, it has kicked off a free laundry for Tufts campaign and collaborated with Defund Somerville Police Department, Mutual Aid for Medford and Somerville and have advocated for “Yes on 1” in Massachusetts.

Tufts ACTION, a student-run group that promotes civic action in greater Boston, hosted a letter-writing event on Oct. 21 in which they partnered with Vote Forward to comprise a list

of voters in swing states who are at risk of not voting and wrote letters encouraging them to vote.

Sophomore Alison Cedarbaum and senior Danielle Piccoli detailed ACTION’s nonpartisan efforts to educate future voters who are too young to vote in these elections, while highlighting the importance of immediate engagement for the midterms just around the corner. “[We’re] very focused around civic empowerment and making sure that both young people in the Tufts community, as well as people in the broader surrounding community who will be able to vote in a few years … have other ways of making their voices heard,” Cedarbaum said.

JumboVote has been tabling in the Campus Center to help students register to vote and provide voting information

to mitigate barriers to voting in these upcoming midterms.

Junior Safi Chalfin-Smith, a co-chair of JumboVote, detailed how JumboVote is working to increase voter turnout.

“I think [the midterms are] missing in the conversation on campus, especially compared to 2020,” Chalfin-Smith said. “[In 2020], everyone was talking about the election, whereas now, I don’t think it’s as big of a topic. … Once we say, ‘There is an election, this is what’s going to be on the ballot, and this is why it’s important,’ people are definitely receptive.”

JumboVote will be offering rides to polling stations from the campus center on election day in addition to hosting an election watch party with other Tisch-affiliated groups.

News

Tuesday, November 8, 2022 | News | THE TUFTS DAILY

3

Proposed Fair Share Amendment would raise funds for infrastructure, education MILLIONAIRES

continued from page 1 education and transportation,” Medford City Councilor Zac Bears wrote in an email to the Daily In contrast, Eitan Hersh, an associate professor of political science at Tufts, voiced doubts that the state would be able to spend the money in an effective manner.

“Many people see the problems in transit and education as not problems that money can easily solve,” Hersh wrote in an email to the Daily.

Somerville City Councilor Ben Ewen-Campen said that the millionaire’s tax would help reduce inequality in Massachusetts.

“Passing this amendment would be the crowning achievement of decades of progressive

activism in Massachusetts,” Ewen-Campen wrote in an email to the Daily. “Our state is a wealthy one, and we do very well by wealthy residents – the problem is inequality, and the gap between the government serves the rich versus everyone else. The way to fix this is to tax the very wealthy in order to lift up the 99%, and this amendment does just that.”

Bears believes that voting “Yes” on Question 1 would have a positive impact on both local and state finances.

“Cities and towns need more funding for public schools, transit, and road repairs, and the YES on 1 Fair Share Amendment is the fairest way possible to raise those funds,” Bears wrote.

Bears, Ewen-Campen and Somerville City Councilor Matthew McLaughlin view the amendment as critical to ensuring that necessary local initiatives are well-funded and public transportation is efficient and safe.

“I support the Fair Share Amendment because Massachusetts needs revenue to repair our crumbling infrastructure and fund quality public education,” McLaughlin wrote in an email to the Daily.

To McLaughlin, who represents the neighborhood of East Somerville, poor infrastructure is extremely personal to him and his community.

“In the last few months, we had an Orange Line train catch on fire, which caused residents to leap from the train,

risking their lives,” he wrote.

“The entire Orange Line was shut down for almost a month because of decades of neglect. I believe Question 1 will provide a much needed stream of revenue to address this longstanding problem.”

Ewen-Campen wrote that the City of Somerville “would directly benefit from desperately needed additional revenue for public transit, safe street initiatives, and our public schools.”

Bears agreed with this sentiment.

“The Fair Share Amendment is likely to have a highly positive impact on state aid that helps support Medford’s city budget,” he wrote.

Ewen-Campen called for voters to vote “Yes” on Question 1.

“Corporate interests are pouring money into aggressive disinformation campaigns to attack the Fair Share Amendment, so it is critical that we turn out to vote Yes on 1,” he wrote.

Despite support from progressives, there is opposition to the amendment. Hersh explained the arguments against the proposed tax.

“As the law is written, it might have unintended consequences and affect more people than the targeted group,” Hersh wrote.

“We’re losing population and business to states like Texas and Florida. If the tax burden is too high on the wealthy, the concern is that we’ll lose out in economic competitiveness to other states.

That will have downstream consequences for everyone.”

UNIVERSITY

Department of Political Science hosts panel ahead of November elections

by Amelia Colafati Staff Writer

Editor’s note: Emily Thompson is the Executive News Editor of The Tufts Daily. Thompson was not involved in the writing or editing of this article.

On Nov. 2, the Tufts Political Science department hosted a panel discussion on the upcoming midterm election. The discussion, titled “What to Look for on Election Night: A Political Science Pre-Election Panel Discussion,” included Tufts political science Professors Deborah Schildkraut and Brian Schaffner, Boston College political science Professor Masha Krupenkin and Tufts Cooperation and InnoVation in Citizenship club Co-President Magali Ortiz.

The panel was chaired by junior Emily Thompson, who began the night by noting that this election is the first in which the response to COVID-19 is not a major part of candidates’ platforms. Thompson asked about the impact of this societal change on voter turnout.

Krupenkin responded by speaking about the increased popularity of voting by mail.

“A lot of people who have been elected today … for the Republican party … have been very benefited by the robust vote-by-mail infrastructure,” Krupenkin said.

Thompson then asked about political violence amid the recent attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Packard Hall, home of the political science department, is pictured on Nov. 4.

Schaffner spoke of the divisions between Republicans and Democrats, and how these divisions are most visible in the differences of key issues that both parties are advocating for. Schaffner said Republicans focused on issues surrounding the economy, such as inflation, while Democrats focused on recent attacks on democratic processes.

Schildkraut added that it is hard to gauge people’s views of political violence.

“We haven’t polled on this very much for very long,” Schildkraut said. “We started asking about how much we cared about political violence once there [was] political violence. … If you ask people, ‘How important is it that there’s this violence?’ and you

say 48% say yes — is that a lot?

A little? Is it changing? We don’t know, because we’re only asking about it now.”

Asked about the effects of inflation and the health of the economy on voters’ decision-making processes, Schildkraut explained the impact of the economy on the incumbent party.

“At the presidential level, … if the economy is doing well, it is assumed to benefit the incumbent or the incumbent’s party,” Schildkraut said. “If the economy is doing poorly, the challenger will try to make the election be about the economy.”

Thompson asked whether political action the week before Nov. 8 could determine the outcome of the election. Schaffner suggested that the week before

ANNA STEINBOCK / THE TUFTS DAILY

the election may have minimal effects on its outcome, citing a national survey which revealed only a low percentage of voters are undecided on whom they will vote for.

Krupenkin offered a different perspective, referencing the letter from James Comey to Congress in 2016 that may have shifted the balance in the election from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump, suggesting that late-in-the-game actions can have large impacts.

Schildkraut added that she believed that voter mobilization — actions like knocking on doors, calling people and encouraging them to vote — can matter.

“One other late thing that I think can matter is mobilization,” Schildkraut said.

“Encouragement to vote … [for example] let me give you a ride to the polls, … and so it’s important to [focus on] not dropping the ball on that sort of stuff later in the game.”

Thompson then asked whether we should be able to trust the polls this election.

Schaffner responded that pollsters have been having a hard time producing accurate representations of the American voting populace because response rates have been low. He also added that even given the uncertainty, the election outlook looks poor for Democrats.

“Even if Democrats won the generic House ballot, … they would still probably lose about 14 seats in the House,” Schaffner said.

He later added that he believes President Biden can win again if he runs in 2024.

“If I were to give advice to the Democratic party, I would probably say: run the incumbent [in 2024],” Schaffner said.

“Democrats were always going to lose seats in [this] election … because most people are going to vote Democratic or Republican, and the ones in the middle … are just reacting to what’s happened in the last few years.”

4 Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Features

tuftsdaily.com

Votes that count: Tufts students from swing states

by David Van Riper Contributing Writer

Midterms are upon us, and while most Tufts students — and most Americans — come from solidly Democratic and Republican states, the swing state voters on campus will have a disproportionate impact this Tuesday. Out of the 6,676 undergraduates at Tufts in fall of 2021, 524 were from states where the margin of victory was less than 5% in the 2020 presidential election — about 8% of the student population.

Sam Brenner is a sophomore majoring in international relations from Brookhaven, Ga., a suburb of Atlanta. Georgia has become a swing state recently, with Democrats narrowly voting blue in the presidential election and both Senate races in 2020. Brenner’s hometown has followed the statewide trend.

“My precinct specifically voted for McCain, Romney, Clinton and Biden,” Brenner said. “I’m from a disproportionately white, disproportionately well-educated part of Atlanta. So it’s essentially a lot of people who, probably 10 years ago, would perceive themselves as very partisan Republicans that were extremely turned off by the Trump era and have become extremely Democratic.”

The most competitive statewide race in Georgia this election season is between the Rev. Raphael Warnock, the incumbent, and Herschel Walker. Warnock won his seat in the 2020 special election after the previously elected senator resigned. According to Brenner, many people have a positive impression of Warnock.

“Warnock is … also an extremely strong candidate, people just dig his vibe,” Brenner said. “He has this goofy pastor energy that I think a lot of people, especially in highly educated parts of Atlanta, find relatable and fun.”

Brenner’s view of Warnock is polar opposite to his view of Walker.

“Herschel Walker is probably the worst possible candidate Republicans could have possibly found for the state of Georgia,” he said. “He is just categorically insane. It’s worse if you live in Georgia because you have to deal with all of his scandals on the local news every night.”

Although Walker opposes abortion politically, he has allegedly paid for multiple of his ex-partners’ abortions. However, Brenner is not sure that these allegations will hurt him electorally.

“The Republican base really doesn’t care about the morality of their candidates,” he said. “They just care that their candidates are going to sign off on the judges and the policies that they want. … They’ll go with someone who’s paid for 90 abortions if it’s going to be someone who’s going to vote to confirm the next right-wing Supreme Court justice,” Brenner said.

VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Swing state voters will potentially decide control of the Senate in 2023.

Georgia’s governor, Brian Kemp, is also up for election this midterm. Stacey Abrams is challenging him for a second time after he beat her in the 2018 gubernatorial election. Kemp currently has a significant lead in the polls. Brenner believes that voters view Kemp as more moderate than he actually is.

“He’s received this ‘moderate aura’ that he doesn’t really deserve because of the fact that he refused to literally commit a crime in 2020 by not certifying the Georgia election results, even though … he’s the second or third most conservative governor in the country, despite presiding over a state that in 2020 was literally 50-50,” Brenner said.

Kemp is polling significantly ahead of Walker, indicating that split-ticket voters may decide this election in Georgia. Brenner knows people who may split their vote because of the contrast between Walker and Kemp.

“A lot of my friends’ parents who I know who are more on the conservative side, who really like Kemp, will be voting for him and potentially Warnock just because they can’t stand how bad of a character Herschel Walker is,” Brenner said.

While the Senate race is neckand-neck and Abrams is significantly behind in the gubernatorial race, Democrats in Georgia have reason for optimism if past trends continue. Brenner explained that Democrats have defied nationwide trends in Georgia in recent election cycles.

“Georgia has moved to the left, even in environments where the country moved to the right,” he explained.

While Georgia has been consistently moving to the left, near-

by North Carolina has remained just out of reach for Democrats in most recent elections. The state’s governor, Roy Cooper, is a Democrat.

Lillian McKeever is a first-year from Davidson, N.C., a suburb of Charlotte. Davidson is a college town that divides the Charlotte area from the surrounding rural regions.

McKeever became involved in political action after the initial COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020.

“I was at home, and I had nothing to do,” McKeever said.

“My grandma, who lives about a mile and a half from me, was very involved in local politics. And she said, ‘You have no reason to not get involved. You have nothing to do.’”

In recent years, Republicans have just barely won in North Carolina; Trump defeated Biden there by about 1.3% in 2020.

McKeever explained that the state’s competitiveness has motivated her to become more engaged.

“I don’t think I would have gotten involved in the California or the New York state Democratic Party because the stakes just aren’t the same. And so I think one of the reasons I got involved was because there were such high stakes and because I knew that with the state and the local elections, those policies would affect me and would affect my family, and that truly is a driving force for action,” McKeever said.

This election, McKeever believes abortion may galvanize voters who in the past may have been less enthusiastic to vote.

“My town is not the most civically minded all the time. We’re kind of like, ‘We’re a quiet, suburban little place,’” McKeever

said. “[But] my parents were telling me they went to a reproductive rights rally in my town last week. We went to a march as soon as Roe v. Wade was overturned, there was a massive protest. … I think it’s engaging a lot of people who wouldn’t have been civically engaged before.”

In North Carolina, the battle for abortion rights is being fought at the state level.

“We have a Democratic governor, who has right now been vetoing all of the abortion bans that have been going through the North Carolina State House and State Senate. … But right now, it’s really bad, because it’s really close to a [Republican] supermajority [in the state legislature],” McKeever said.

Social issues are also an important factor in Florida this election.

Gigi Copeland is a sophomore studying international relations.

She is from Jensen Beach, Fla. — a small town about an hour from Palm Beach that votes overwhelmingly Republican.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, the incumbent, is currently facing off against Charlie Christ, who was governor from 2007–2011.

DeSantis is currently leading by a large margin in the polls.

However, according to Copeland, some moderates have been turned off by his positions on social issues.

“I think the more conservative Republicans will definitely just stick with DeSantis,” Copeland said. “But for more moderates, like my dad, for example, he’s a moderate Republican, and I convinced him to vote for Charlie Crist. Because Ron DeSantis just made himself the conservative morality police.”

Autumn Steltzer is a senior studying sociology. She is from a predominantly blue suburb of Milwaukee, Wis. Abortion is also a key issue in her state for women across the political spectrum, but she isn’t confident it will affect people’s votes.

“A lot of people are really upset about abortion within the state of Wisconsin, and a lot of conservatives are very upset, [including] conservative women.” Stelzer said. “But they’re not … single issue voters. So even though young conservative women are very, very upset about Roe in Wisconsin, they won’t change their political affiliations.”

Democrats need voters to turn out for issues like abortion to win the Wisconsin Senate race. Sen. Ron Johnson, the incumbent Republican, is facing off against Mandela Barnes, who is currently trailing in the polls. Stelzer isn’t confident in his chances.

“I think red voters in Wisconsin really rally around their causes and have a high voter turnout,” she said. “And I think sadly, I wouldn’t be that surprised if he [Barnes] loses on election day.”

As a resident of a swing state, Stelzer directly sees the effect of her vote and the votes of those around her.

“Living in Milwaukee and knowing that low voter turnout in that area literally [led] to Ron Johnson being in the Senate for [years,] it’s really important that I’m casting my absentee ballot,” Stelzer said. “It really does make a difference. And I wish some people would sort of grasp that a little bit more. … It’s important, especially in swing states like Wisconsin.”

F e at u r e s

Tuesday, November 8, 2022 | Features | THE TUFTS DAILY

5

Perils, pessimism and panic: American democracy in 2022

by Guillem Colom Staff Writer

Disclaimer: Hannah Cox is a contributing writer at the Daily.

Cox was not involved in the writing or editing of this article.

Democracy is a concept that Americans have been accustomed to since the nation’s founding. For many, democracy is an incontrovertibly robust form of governance that establishes fair representation for all and withstands internal political fissures. For some Americans, democracy could not fall, let alone backslide.

Such optimism about democracy can be hard to find in 2022.

More than a year after the Jan. 6 insurrection that jeopardized the peaceful transfer of power for the democratically elected government of President Joe Biden, many Americans are growing anxious about the state of American democracy. A recent Associated Press poll outlines that 52% of Americans believe that democracy is not working in the United States.

Scholars and politicians are also sounding the alarm. A study conducted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace establishes that the United States is experiencing a phenomenon known as “democratic backsliding.” Such backsliding is, in part, fueled by extreme political radicalization that manifests in violence and challenges to free and fair elections.

Biden also warned of America’s democratic backsliding in his Nov. 2 speech, citing election deniers that are running for various positions in the midterm elections and the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Understanding the history of democratic backsliding in America has become central to determining the causes of current threats to American democracy. For Department of Political Science Chair and Associate Professor Nimah Mazaheri, this is not the first occasion America has experienced a manifestation of democratic backsliding.

“We can certainly look throughout American history and find many instances in which you did not have any of those things that we call democracy for all segments of the population,” Mazaheri said. “Things like the increasing role of special interest groups in our political system … increase in gerrymandering, increasing repression of people’s ability to engage in free protests against the government, voter disenfranchisement, … all of these things were surfacing prior to the election of Donald Trump.”

Echoing Mazaheri’s sentiments, Sociology Lecturer Utku Balaban asserted that the seeds of America’s current democratic backsliding were planted before the 21st century. For Balaban, this backsliding emerged from a decline in Americans’ feelings of belonging to a community and a simultaneous increase in social isolation.

VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The Jan. 6 insurrection at the United States Capitol is pictured.

“I don’t think this tension about democracy-related issues just started within the last decade. … [The] historical process … started for the most part in the early 1980s,” Balaban said. “Basically since the 1970s, the unionization rate in the United States has been going down. This … was a strong signal coming from the government to civil society about a new mindset. …

We just witnessed a decline in the interest in public and civil organizations all around the country.”

From Balaban’s perspective, this democratic backsliding is rooted in the conception of American individualism.

Hannah Cox, a junior and the social media manager for Tufts Cooperation and Innovation in Citizenship, discussed the way social media feeds into extremism.

“It can be really hard to be like ‘Wait, I’m falling into this rabbit hole, I need to go look at something from the opposing side and find my own perspective,’” Cox said. “[Social media] just makes it so much … harder to have political discourse and to disagree with other people.”

For Aidan Connors, a firstyear student, social media played a substantial role in exacerbating political radicalization during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic throughout 2020.

“I think a lot of people got really tapped into their phones during the pandemic, because … [we were] all stuck at home,” Connors said. “The thing about social media is that it glorifies bullying, especially in a political sense. You get praised, you get a lot of comments, you get a lot of likes, you get a lot of positive feedback from just saying really mean things about people who have different ideas.”

In the modern age, social media has become a new outlet for people to express their politically motivated aggression. Historically, political violence has been endemic throughout American history, whether that be during the lead-up to the Civil War in the 1850s or reactionary backlash to the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

However, the prevalence of political violence in contemporary America has shocked many policymakers. According to TIME Magazine, more than 9,600 recorded threats were made against congresspeople in 2021, representing a more than tenfold increase since 2016.

Many of these threats are being perpetuated by far-right extremists, some of whom are associated with groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. It is a trend that Cox sees as part of the backsliding process.

“I wouldn’t say that [the Jan. 6 insurrection was] the culmination necessarily, but I do think [it was] a step towards democratic backsliding,” Cox said. “We stand as a symbol of democracy and how democracy can be great but also [a symbol of ] what threats there are to democracy when we allow people to threaten our democracy, and people in the most powerful position in the country to threaten our democracy in violent ways, nonetheless.”

Some scholars are seeing this heightening political radicalization as a stepping stone on the road towards a unique type of authoritarianism in America. What authoritarianism in America could look like, and whether it would ever take hold, is still unknown, but Mazaheri outlined what an American democracy with authoritarian qualities would

look like if it hypothetically emerged.

“I assume that we would still have the electoral system, but you would have a situation where elections are seriously contested, where the losers declare themselves the winners,” Mazaheri said. “You have things like political violence emerging from the supporters of the losers and that sort of fear of unrest emerging. You [could also] have more of this partisanship influence over the main levers of politics: one party being able to [stack] the courts or putting their supporters into influential positions with regards to policymaking.”

As Balaban notes, the causes of these challenges to American democracy are observed in other countries.

Although distinct in important ways, Turkey’s gradual fall to authoritarianism can provide a good example.

“What we saw in Turkey was basically very similar to [America] in the 1980s. For instance, like in the United States, Turkey had extensive pro-market reform … and then gradually, we see the expansion of the global export-oriented industrial relations to Turkey,” Balaban said. “Because Turkey is a smaller country, … the political effects of these developments … became visible much earlier than what we see in the United States. … Just looking at the Turkish experience, we see similar developments in the United States [with] growing political polarization, more income inequality and a growing … form of nationalism [and] anti-immigrant sentiments.”

The outcome of the midterms arrive as pessimism about the future of democracy lingers. The question remains

of what policies need to be implemented to counteract democratic backsliding.

In this context, a sense of urgency around the seriousness of this backsliding is a start, according to Mazaheri.

“I’m very nervous. … In some ways, there are reasons to be optimistic, but there are many reasons to be pessimistic [about the future of American democracy],” Mazaheri said.

“A lot of people in this country have taken [democracy] for granted, but I do not think they are doing that now. It is something you have to be vigilant about in order to preserve [democracy].”

Cox not only expressed a similar urgency but encouraged Tufts students to get more engaged in politics.

“I think everybody, regardless of what [they] believe, is scared that what we believe is not going to be reflected in our country anymore,” Cox said. “I think our democracy is becoming less representative of what the people want, and it’s becoming more politically divided. And I think that is scary … [but] I don’t think that people are doing enough to combat that.”

For Connors, Tufts students can be engaged in various political activities, even if they are not necessarily all-encompassing.

“I am not even saying you need to spearhead your own organizing campaign, [but] if you are voting in your home state, sign up for a phone bank for whoever you are supporting,” Connors said. “We live close to some pretty impoverished areas [where] a lot of groups are doing a lot of important political and community work that you can get involved in easily. I just think that there is a little bit of money [to put] where your mouth is.”

6

THE TUFTS DAILY | ELECTIONS 2022 | Tuesday, November 8, 2022

tuftsdaily.com

2022 Senate Forecast

FiveThirtyEight Forecast:

By Brendan Hartnett and Emily Thompson

Johnson 52.4%, Barnes 47.6%

Editorialist and Executive News Editor

WISCONSIN Cook PVI 2022: R+2

As of Nov. 7, Republicans are favored to win the House. The Senate remains a toss-up, with Republicans slightly favored to win a majority. The Economist’s modeling of Senate outcomes predicts Republicans will win 50.7 seats while Democrats are projected to win 49.3 seats. According to the Cook Political Report, only 12 Senate races are competitive.

NEVADA FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Laxalt 48.8%, Masto 48.6%

Democratic

Cook PVI 2022: R+1

Lean Democratic

ARIZONA

Lean Republican

FiveThirtyEight Forecast:

Republican

Cook PVI 2022: R+2

Kelly 50.2%, Masters 48.0%

Runoff

Arizona: Americans love astronauts and Arizona seems no different: Despite Arizona being more hospitable toward Democrats than other swing states, Senator Mark Kelly (D) is projected to win reelection against Trump-backed Republican Blake Masters.

While Kelly’s lead has shrunk as Republicans have picked up momentum in all Arizona state-wide elections in recent weeks, Kelly remains slightly favored to win — though the political climate remains tense, with election deniers populating the Republican ticket and fears of political violence mount.

Florida: While Democrats had high expectations for Rep. Val Demmings (D FL-10) with a near double-digit lead for incumbent Senator Marco Rubio (R), Florida seems uncompetitive. Republicans can thank Governor Ron DeSantis (R) for codifying Republicans’ dominance in the Sunshine State through his personalistic appeal and vehement opposition to COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Georgia: The former NFL running back Herschel Walker (R) and senior pastor of the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church Senator Raphael Warnock (D) will face-off in one of the closest elections of the year. Despite running on an anti-choice platform and facing allegations that he paid for multiple women’s abortions, Walker’s campaign has gained momentum in the last week of the race. He is slightly above Warnock in the popular vote forecast at 49.5%, versus Warnock’s 49%. If both candidates fail to secure the majority of the vote, the election will move to a runoff election on Dec. 6, with early voting beginning Nov. 14, reminding Democrats of the 2021 majoritydeciding runoff election between Warnock and former Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler. Given how close the race is, a nostalgic runoff appears to be the most likely path forward.

Ohio: Ohio continues to slip from its status as a reliable toss-up state with the Senate election between Republican J.D. Vance and Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan. FiveThirtyEight forecasts Vance, a venture capitalist and author of the controversial book Hillbilly Elegy, an 85% chance of winning against Ryan. Polls have Vance leading as much as 10% and similarly predict a big win for Mike DeWine, the Republican nominee for governor, meaning it is not a great year to run as a Democrat in the Buckeye state.

E

Tuesday, November 8, 2022 | ELECTIONS 2022 | THE TUFTS DAILY

OHIO FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Vance 53.1%, Ryan 46.9% Cook PVI 2022: R+6

NEW HAMPSHIRE FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Hassan 50.9%, Bolduc 47.4% Cook PVI 2022: D+1

PENNSYLVANIA FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Oz 49.4%, Fetterman 48.6% Cook PVI 2022: R+2

NORTH CAROLINA FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Budd 51.5%, Beasley 48.7% Cook PVI 2022: R+3

GEORGIA FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Walker 49.9%, Warnock 48.7% Cook PVI 2022: R+3

FLORIDA FiveThirtyEight Forecast: Rubio 54.0%, Demings 44.2% Cook PVI 2022: R+3

Nevada: Six years after being elected to the Senate with 47% of the vote, Catherine Cortez Masto (D) faces another contentious election. As of Oct. 24, the Siena College/The New York Times Upshot poll does not favor either candidate. Most other pollsters forecast the Republican nominee and current Attorney General of NV Adam Laxalt (R) wins by 3%–6% of the vote. This race is a classic toss-up, but with history consistently disfavoring the party in power in midterm elections and polls pointing to a general GOP lead, the Daily is calling this election for Laxalt.

New Hampshire: To Democrats’ dismay, the senate race in New Hampshire is tighter than expected.

While Senator Maggie Hassan (D) is still projected to win reelection, the New Hampshire senate race is tighter than expected despite Donald Bolduc’s (R) lack of experience in public office.

Bulouc’s competitiveness derives from his charisma and “everyman appeal” which has gained sympathy with voters. Should Bolduc win, we expect nearly every competitive race to be decided for Republicans.

North Carolina: Although Cheri Beasley has consistently outraised her Republican opponent, Ted Budd, the Democrat has a low probability of being elected to the Senate. Polls place Budd ahead of Beasley by 5%–7% and FiveThirtyEight gives him an 81% chance of winning.

Pennsylvania: This entertaining race between Lieutenant Gov. John Fetterman (D) and Dr. Mehmet Oz (R) is labeled a toss-up by FiveThirtyEight, with Fetterman’s once-distant lead shrinking to well within the margin of error following a stroke he suffered in May 2022. Though the lead Fetterman once held thanks to his populist style of politics that appealed to rural populations in central Pennsylvania has faded since his stroke. If Fetterman can capitalize on the support for his party’s candidate for governor — a race in which Attorney General Josh Shapiro (D) faces off against Doug Mastriano (R) who attended Trump’s Jan. 6 rally and has continuously denied the legitimacy of President Biden’s 2020 victory despite Pennsylvania’s overwhelming acceptance of Biden’s victory — Democrats will be better positioned to hold the Senate.

Wisconsin: Though Wisconsin remains competitive in national elections, Senator Ron Johnson (R) is favored to win reelection. Polling five points behind Johnson in a state where polls have failed to capture support for Republican candidates in past elections, challenger and Lieutenant Governor Mandela Barnes (D) is unlikely to win. Johnson’s racist undertones and attacks against Barnes that accuse him of being soft on crime have divided voters, but ultimately the polls indicate Johnson will hold his office.

7

8

THE TUFTS DAILY | Features | Tuesday, November 8, 2022

tuftsdaily.com

Open dialogues: Conservatism at Tufts

by Carmen Smoak Contributing Writer

American politics have become vividly polarized in recent years, as “the correlation between party and ideology has really tightened,” according to Tufts’ Professor of Political Science Deborah Schildkraut.

Open-minded dialogues between people of differing ideological stances are lacking, both at Tufts and across the nation. Indeed, ‘conservatism’ has taken on strong connotations in many people’s minds, across the current divisive political spectrum, especially on a campus where a majority of the student body is liberal.

Many political conversations at Tufts are not wholly representative of views across the political spectrum. The openness of conversations and perceptions of those with different political ideologies holds great power over how students build their worldviews while at Tufts.

With this context in mind, Eitan Hersh, associate professor of political science, explained his view of Tufts’ political climate.

“I think that Tufts is an unusual environment where the student population is overwhelmingly liberal. It’s even overwhelmingly liberal, it seems, relative to the general population of young adults [and] to the general population of people in Massachusetts,” Hersh said. “I think students find themselves in some kind of a bubble.”

Hersh elaborated on the importance of political diversity at Tufts. He hopes that, through the course, students who identify as conservative will gain a stronger sense of their political ideology and students who identify as liberal will be exposed to perspectives contrary to their own.

“Part of one’s education, particularly in politics, I think should be making sure one understands different perspectives,” Hersh said. “Half of the country finds a lot of value in both that identity of being conservative and in conservative perspectives on major policy issues.”

As Hersh pointed out, the uneven distribution of political views on Tufts’ campus creates a particular dynamic between students. Andrew Butcher, president of Tufts Republicans, said he has observed a social stigma around conservative voices and perspectives at Tufts.

“There’s always that fear of the human tendency towards tribalism, and there’s a very significant, and I personally would claim not unfounded, fear that if people were to realize that their classmates or their students were conservative, that would negatively affect that student,” Butcher said.

In this context, Tufts Republicans aims to provide a space for open-minded dialogues on conservative ideologies, according to Butcher.

He further articulated that the

club’s twofold purpose is to “advocate for and forward conservative values and policies on campus,” and to provide a space for those with conservative ideologies to discuss their viewpoints without fear of judgment by their peers.

This sense of community and commitment to conversation, Butcher emphasized, is the most vital function of the Tufts Republicans on a predominantly liberal campus.

Still, questions remain. Are students open to discussing ideologies across the political spectrum? Are students challenged to think beyond their own opinions? What do students gain from a politically diversified education, inside and outside the classroom?

In thinking about these questions, the Presidents of Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans as well as with Political Science Faculty Hersh and Schildkraut offered a wide range of perspectives to consider.

Beyond scheduled interclub debates between the Tufts Republicans and Tufts Democrats, such as the CIVIC debate, there is a lack of cross-party dialogue on campus, according to Butcher.

Butcher explained a potential reason behind the lack of interaction across political differences.

“As with any ideology, or any perspective, there can be a little bit of circling the wagons. There can be a little bit of a tendency to just go, ‘We think this, we’re right … the other people are wrong, and we don’t necessarily need to go out and start those conversations,’” Butcher said.

To counter this trend, Butcher underscored the importance of open dialogues, which can help

shape students’ political views and understandings.

“I would love to have more conversations with people who disagree with me on things. I think those conversations are really interesting. I think that if people approach it well, you can change minds,” Butcher said. “I look at myself as a testament to that. I did not used to think the way that I do. … I think we rob ourselves of some really great experiences of discussion when we aren’t willing to open our minds to change.”

On a mostly liberal campus like Tufts, political dialogues look different for students of differing ideologies. Butcher explained that being in the minority, as a right-leaning student, can stimulate personal and intellectual growth.

“Conservative students who go into more liberal institutions wind up a bit more politically informed and get more out of the experience than a liberal student who goes into a liberal institution. And I think that if academia ran more conservative, the converse would be true,” Butcher said. “Walking into an environment where you are challenged on your viewpoint, almost every day, will lead to you sharpening that viewpoint or changing it.”

Mark Lannigan, president of Tufts Democrats, shared Butcher’s concern that Tufts students do not have enough cross-party dialogues on campus.

“I do think we should have more open dialogue, and I do think we should have more back and forth,” Lannigan said. “I think it’s just difficult right now, with misinformation that’s out and this kind of truth denial philosophy that’s going on on the right, to have those

dialogues in a very meaningful manner.”

Lannigan further elaborated that “politics has become very personal for people,” making it difficult to have open dialogues from differing ideological standpoints.

Lannigan also spoke of the distinct perspectives within the Tufts Democrats club.

“I’ve certainly challenged my own beliefs with people who are in the club and are like-minded and are Democrats themselves,” Lannigan said. “We go back and forth about differences in ideas and strategy and all that, and I think that’s productive.”

In terms of being challenged through broader open dialogues, Lannigan shared that he has had professors with a diversity of opinions and conversations with peers that hold “competing ideas of what the Democratic Party should be.”

“I feel like my views have been challenged by people within the party, which maybe doesn’t challenge them incredibly far,” Lannigan said.

The topic of open dialogue is particularly important in the classroom context as well.

Hersh is teaching a new course in the spring, titled American Conservatism, which aims to expose Tufts students to conservative ideologies and policy positions with the goal of broadening their perspectives and creating diverse, acrossthe-aisle conversations.

“In order to really engage in a healthy dialogue, students need to really cultivate a sense of who they are and what they care about and what their values are,” Hersh said. “And I think, unless you’re actively cultivating a sense of political identity and grappling with policy issues

COURTESY EITAN HERSH, MARK LANNIGAN, ANDREW BUTCHER AND DEBORAH SCHILDKRAUT

Eitan Hersh, Mark Lannigan, Andrew Butcher and Deborah Schildkraut are pictured.

in a classroom setting, it’s harder to go into a dialogue.”

In a politically charged moment, open-minded dialogues are more vital to the health of democracy than ever.

The way in which students view ideologically different parties, as well as their experiences of cross-party dialogues, can influence how they vote.

Lannigan expressed his views on the likelihood of students voting along party lines in the midterms.

“I do think there’s definitely more emphasis on voting pure party, not just from people’s own … partisan conception, but also parties are encouraging people to vote down the party line,” Lannigan said.

As students navigate different political ideologies, identities and party affiliations, open dialogues are critical to understanding the difference between ideology and political party and how that can play into voting.

To this end, Hersh hopes to contribute to the dialogues through his course on American conservatism next spring. The difference between these two markers can be better understood in an academic environment, according to Hersh.

“I want to, in teaching a class on conservatism, separate Republican identity from conservative identity,” Hersh said. “I think they’re two different things. And I think you can make a strong case that a lot of the contemporary Republican policies are actually inconsistent with conservative values.”

Echoing Hersh’s sentiment, Schildkraut explained the importance of parsing out the difference between the Republican party and conservatism as a political ideology.

“If one of the big pillars of conservatism in the United States was a notion of minimal government, kind of a libertarian strain. I do think that it does seem to be in flux when you see conservatives in state governments proposing [and] dictating what can be taught in schools or who people can marry,” Schildkraut said. “That seems to contradict the notion of having minimal government.””

At the end of the day, the ways students engage in political dialogue, including the breadth of opinions they are exposed to, is greatly important to developing a sense of political identity.

Along these lines, Hersh urged Tufts students to engage and grapple with perspectives that might be contrary to their own.

“I would say that students should just really read widely and make sure that they are learning from a diverse set of voices,” Hersh said. “If there’s an issue that is divisive in the country, … and if students haven’t really grappled with, ‘Why do people disagree with them?

What’s going on the other side of the issue? Who would I talk to to learn about that in a serious way?’ then they’re just sort of in [an] echo chamber.”

Arts & Pop Culture

tuftsdaily.com

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Enter a fairytale in ‘The School for Good and Evil’

by Alexis Enderle

Matthew Winkler Winkler’s Weekly Symphony Guide

The BSO’s fall finale

O

Assistant Arts Editor

One of the newest movies on Netflix, “The School for Good and Evil,” is based on Soman Chainani’s 2013 novel of the same name. Have you ever wondered where fairy tales like Cinderella and Jack and the Beanstalk come from?

Two best friends, Sophie and Agatha of Gavaldon, have long used them to escape their mundane lives. Sophie dreams of a future where she is a princess, but Agatha just wants her best friend to stay by her side while she endures daily harassment as the daughter of the town’s “witch.” Though they are extremely different, their friendship remains strong, at least until magic joins the equation. The rumored School for Good and Evil enters their lives, taking them away from their homes and into an environment where the rules don’t always make sense. Will their friendship survive this school of heroes and villains or will they face consequences far more dire than bad blood as the semester continues?

Sophia Anne Caruso of “Beetlejuice” (2019–) on Broadway and Sofia Wylie from “High School Musical: The Musical: The Series” (2019–) star as Sophie and Agatha, with Kit Young as Rafal and Jamie Flatters as Tedros, the son of King Arthur. Charlize Theron, Kerry Washington, Laurence Fishburne and Michelle Yeoh round out the cast, playing teachers at the fantastical school. The costumes are beautiful and highlight the characters’ personalities. The special effects are done very well for a direct-to-streaming movie, and the writers adapted the book with very few changes to the plot. Director Paul Feig, who has also directed “Last Christmas” (2019) and “Ghostbusters” (2016), and the all-star cast do a great job bringing this book to life. If you’ve read any of Chainani’s books then you know this is no small feat. The soundtrack, which features Olivia Rodrigo’s “brutal” among other pop hits, contrasts with the otherworldly sets and costumes in a manner that complements — rather than distracting from — the world of the film.

Fans of all things Disney and fairy tale retellings will thoroughly enjoy this movie. The two female protagonists are strong-willed and persistent as they navigate a school where they stand out as “readers” from a land out-

9

VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The cover of “The School of Good and Evil” (2013) novel, the basis of the 2022 film, is pictured. side fairy tales. They must fight monsters from their nightmares, as well as their classmates, in a school where failing an assignment means you are one step closer to living as a talking teapot or as a helpful woodland animal.

Harry Potter fans will enjoy the scenes where Sophie and Agatha learn “uglification” and “beautification,” and train to survive fairytales. You don’t need to have read the books to enjoy this movie as the story is slightly altered — although if you need a fun book to read, the source material is a good

choice. Agatha and Sophie are compelling, flawed characters who don’t entirely fit into the categories expected of them at the school, leading to conflicts with their classmates, professors and each other. The fight scenes are expertly choreographed, with special effects captivating the viewer as princes and princesses duel cyclops and many other villains.

If you’re looking for a heartwarming fantasy tale of friendship and adventure, look no further than “The School for Good and Evil.”

n Nov. 3 the Boston Symphony Orchestra showcased their third and final program that they will be performing on their weeklong tour of Japan. The program consisted of Caroline Shaw’s “Punctum” for string orchestra, Mozart’s “Symphony No. 40” and Richard Strauss’ “An Alpine Symphony.” In addition to these pieces, the BSO is taking the past two weeks of performances on the road. Between Mahler’s “Symphony No. 6,” Shostakovich’s “Symphony No. 5” and now Strauss’ “An Alpine Symphony,” the consistent theme behind their Japan tour is gargantuan catharsis that showcases the orchestra’s virtuosity.

Despite their commitment to modernizing the orchestra in their concerts at home, Shaw’s “Punctum” is the only piece written in the past 80 years that the BSO will perform in Japan. Even then, Shaw’s work is historicist as a direct response to J.S. Bach’s “St. Matthew’s Passion.” While Shaw’s use of portamento (sliding of notes) splashed modern color on her response to Bach, it was ultimately a conforming, non-provoking piece. The few times she began to experiment I wanted more, but instead I left with an impression of pleasant mediocrity. Of all the new works the BSO has put on this season, this was by far the tamest and most fit for bourgeoisie ears belonging to those with pretentious notions of what classical music should be.

Mozart’s “Symphony No. 40” followed Shaw’s “Punctum”: a frankly bizarre inclusion within their program both for the Nov. 3 Boston performance, and within the context of all the works the BSO is bringing to Japan. The orchestra’s uninspired and by-thebooks performance of the Mozart piece did not provide justification for including such a ubiquitously famous and cliché work. The inclusion of “Symphony No. 40” is even more odd when considering the works it’s placed alongside. Where does cliché classical music stand alongside deeply emotional gargantuan late Romantic works, embodied

by Mahler’s “Symphony No. 6” and Strauss’ “An Alpine Symphony,” or next to the unsettling propagandistic Shostakovich piece “Symphony No. 5?”

Following Mozart’s piece, “An Alpine Symphony” closed the concert. The piece is a tone poem written for an absurdly large and involved orchestra. In addition to the massive size which includes two timpanis, two piccolos, two bass tubas, two harps, eight French horns, four trumpets and four trombones, the piece also calls for such unconventional instruments as the heckelphone, the Wagner tuba, cowbells and a wind and a thunder machine. If classical music has the erroneous reputation of restraint, then this piece is the antithesis. Even more so than the two other self-aggrandizing works the BSO is taking to Japan, “An Alpine Symphony” goes beyond any point of return. While Strauss goes too far even by late Romantic standards, thereby undermining the artistic intention of the work by entering humorous banality, the standout performance of the BSO for the night was clearly “An Alpine Symphony.” If the Mozart piece was uninspired, then the Strauss piece clearly demonstrated just how much emotion and consideration the BSO could bring to a work.

Matthew Winkler is a sophomore studying history and music. Matthew can be reached at matthew.winkler@tufts.edu.

10

THE TUFTS DAILY | Fun & Games | Tuesday, November 8, 2022

F& G

LATE NIGHT AT THE DAILY Ty to Julia: “You should date the guy who runs the post office.”

Fun & Games Last Week’s Solutions

tuftsdaily.com

SUDOKU BY ANUSHKA SINGH

Difficulty Level: Casting a love spell during a lax party.

MISSED CONNECTIONS You: An excellent conversationalist. Me: Don’t know what to ask after “what’s your major.” When: Saturday night. Where: Mystery date for a party You: living in wren but it seemed like you didnt really exist at all. you didnt know a lot of basic information about tufts like what dewick or metcalf was, my friends had never heard of you and something seemed off but i was intrigued. i never got to meet any of your friends. im not sure you are real? if i hadnt spent so much time with you, i wouldnt have believed you were anything more than just some girl from wren. but i met you, and i know youre real. Me: confused about your existence. wishing we could reconnect. When: 2020. Where: wren and only wren and never anywhere else.

CROSSWORD BY LUCAS CHUA ACROSS 1 Corp. exec 5 "Portrait of Dora ___" 9 Hate 14 Bank offering 15 Pinnacle 16 Yogurt dip from India 17 Prefix with sphere 18 College student's dream, get ____ 19 Clothing 20 POTUS' bed is here 23 Davis of "Do the Right Thing" 24 Poem of Praise 25 Suffix for some drinks 28 4 reptilian teens who live in the sewers and hangout with an old rat 33 NBA stats 36 Navy commando 37 Tee, e.g.

38 Greek war God 40 Canon competitor 43 Magazine contents 44 Pearly whites 46 "My Way" lyricist 48 Western treaty group Abbr.

49 Gain one's value 53 JFK's predecessor 54 Loosely Hang 55 Philippine island

59 Wore 28- across on Halloween, some would call him 1- across, and lives in a 20across equivalent.

Overall a cool dude!

64 Protruding part of planetary rings 66 Frozen drink brand 67 What people go to the beach for 68 Rollercoaster attraction 69 German coal region 70 One who is uncool 71 Words for actors 72 Lion's pride 73 Offshore DOWN 1 Socrates student 2 Writers Henry and Philip 3 Furniture designer Charles _____ 4 Trap at a ski lodge, say 5 Niger neighbor 6 _____ must have three names, T.S Eliot 7 French friend 8 ______ ChillI Peppers 9 Debater 10 Sheep sounds 11 What gentlemen do on prom

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 24 28 34

35

38

29

44

31

42

46

25

26

27

50

57

58

51

48 52

55

60

65

43 47

54 59

13

32

41

45

53

12

37 40

49

64

30

36 39

11

22

23

33

10

61

62

56

63

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

12 Gambling letters 13 ___ Tafari (Haile Selassie) 21 "Who does he think ___!"

22 Norfolk sch.

26 Skin care prefix 27 These, in Spanish 29 "___ Blu Dipinto Di Blu": 1958 hit 30 Rays pitcher, ___ Seo 31 A.K.A 32 Lil Wayne's "___ Carter III" 33 Destined 34 Step 35 Come to senses 39 Subway stop Abbr.

41 Brain and spinal cord Abbr.

42 Alias

45 Party organiser 47 Too 50 Opposite of "Yah" 51 Narcissist's problem 52 River of Fairbanks 56 Friends 57 Not ___ in the world 58 UFC's Rousey 60 Back of neck 61 College varsity divisions 62 Have a little lamb, say 63 Measly 64 In poker, "___ in!"

65 "There's ___ in team"

tuftsdaily.com

Opinion

11 Tuesday, November 8, 2022

VIEWPOINT

Debates are dwindling, but discourse is more important than ever

by Toby Winick Staff Writer

In an era of political polarization, the increasingly-rare swing voter becomes all the more important.

Campaigns rush to promote their ideas as well as discredit the opposition’s. Of course, these goals have always been present, which is why the campaign debate has become one of the most honored traditions of each election cycle. However, debate numbers have been dwindling recently and some worry that this is the start of a scary new trajectory.

Since the first nationally televised debate between John F. Kennedy and incumbent Richard Nixon — in which Kennedy’s cha-

GRAPHIC BY ALIZA KIBEL

risma and polished appearance sparked an upset victory — it has been considered a strategic blunder to avoid debates. It is important to engage with both citizens and press as well as face an opponent directly, adding a human element to the debates. In contrast, today, debates don’t seem to be strategic or valued at all. There are a number of factors that address this trend.

First, debates simply do not serve the same purpose that they once did. When Kennedy and Nixon debated, it broke records in television viewership and reached tens of millions of households. The new era of civic engagement that TV promised has since been usurped by social media and the internet.

Fewer Americans watch TV news, and more than 80% report getting their news digitally through platforms like social media, news websites and podcasts. Moreover, younger generations are at the forefront of these trends, signaling a shift in voter outreach toward the electorate of the future.

This digital age works for candidates too: The University of Texas at Austin’s Moody School of Communication writes that media algorithms can create a biased expe-

rience, absent of opposing views.

When users interact positively with certain viewpoints, they will be shown more information that supports those ideas. This means that candidates can easily rally and solidify their base online. Indeed, some prominent conservatives have even created or flocked to their own social media platforms with the presumed purpose of avoiding liberal users.

As methods of communication have changed, debates have attempted to adapt with them. To appease a shortened attention span and disinterest in nuance, debates have evolved into a television spectacle. The diminishing number of voters who do watch debates are treated to something far from civil discourse. Candidates shout, mock, interrupt each other and show little regard for rules and moderators.

Candidates aim to embarrass rather than overcome, and they live in fear of being the next in-line for jokes via internet memes or late-night television. We have created our own structural barriers to discourse, making the act of “winning” a debate seemingly impossible to candidates in a sea of media takeaways and viral clips. Of all the gubernatorial and

senate races, only five have seen multiple debates, while in other competitive races such as Arizona and Pennsylvania’s governorships, there haven’t been any at all. Now, for the majority of candidates, it seems the only winning move is not to play.

Avoiding these structural barriers would certainly benefit candidates like John Fetterman, who was put on the spot in a debate about a recent stroke as the word of his doctors on his ability to serve was not enough for many voters. This rhetoric reeked of ableism, and it shows that despite accepting numerous physically impaired politicians such as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, voters are less accommodating of other health issues.

Even so, these trends hardly reflect a more accommodating America. Attacks on the debate system easily become attacks on opponents themselves. Arizona Senate Candidate Katie Hobbs wouldn’t debate her opponent Kari Lake even after a deadline extension, stating she didn’t want Lake to create another “spectacle” like she did in the primaries. Attempts by Pennsylvania Republican Doug Mastriano to skew the debate system by eliminating

traditional media and using candidate-chosen moderators were met with understandable backlash by opponent Josh Shapiro. Mastriano attacked Shapiro as “reluctant” and Shapiro spokesman Will Simons called it an “obvious stunt” to help his “extreme agenda.” Favored candidates are able to avoid a blunder, while underdogs drag their opponents into dangerous rhetorical cycles.

These cycles only feed into political polarization that makes compromise among politicians even harder. Candidates refuse to hear each other out, and the result is a disdain or disrespect to the democratic ideal of dialogue. As a result, it is unlikely that debates will reach their former level of prominence. This backslide is damaging, but we must not let it become the new norm. As voters, it is important to not just register to vote and consider candidate beliefs in voting but to actually participate in this discourse. This can be as simple as watching a debate on TV or attending a town hall and emailing your representatives to participate.

Not only will you be a more educated voter, but you will demonstrate to politicians that voters still value democratic discourse.

VIEWPOINT

How America’s institutions are failing us

by Maxwell Shoustal and Keshav Srikant Staff Writer and Contributing Writer

Joe Biden is on top of the world. Or at least he should be.

Throughout his presidency, Biden has been quietly making changes popular with the American people. Yet, polls show Republicans are highly likely to win back the House from Democratic control and are more likely than not to win the Senate. Given the popularity of Biden’s policies, our electoral system ought to be altered to better reflect the will of the people.

Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure plan has the support of a majority of Americans. The Democrats’ American Rescue Plan won even more support with 70% of Americans backing it — notably including 73% of independents. It received widespread support for good reason, since the legislation has created 4 million new jobs, and nearly doubled GDP growth while only raising inflation by 0.35%. It also includes the child tax credit, which has lifted 2.9 million children out of poverty.

Additionally, Biden’s economic policies have arguably been the most successfully impactful since President Bill Clinton’s. His successes include an unemployment rate between 3.5% and 4%, down from 6.3% when he took office, and the creation of a record-breaking 10 million jobs since he took office.

The issue of inflation has been used unfairly by Republicans to undermine Biden and the Democrats. Although inflation is

a real issue facing many individuals across the country and must be addressed, the tools needed to do so are largely out of the control of either party, and it’s illogical to assume electing Republicans would fix the issue.

Inflation is a worldwide issue, not a Democratic one. The United Kingdom, under the conservatives, is experiencing inflation at 10.1%, while the EU’s annual inflation rate stands at 10.7%. The U.S.’s rate is only 8.2%. Inflation is clearly a worldwide issue with roots in the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine. Coupled with the fact that Republicans’ plans for combating inflation are unlikely to succeed according to top economists, Biden cannot reasonably be blamed for the current situation.

The Republican party is also running on an extremely unpopular platform that should be rejected. Republicans are out of step with the majority of Americans on issues such as climate change, Social Security and Medicare.

Donald Trump polls at around 40% but most Republican candidates, such as J.D. Vance, embrace him. Many Republicans, such as Herschel Walker and Adam Laxalt, are also running on banning or restricting abortion, despite Roe v. Wade being highly popular with a 60% approval rate.

On Tuesday, the country will decide between Biden’s Democratic Party and the far-right Republican Party. Given that they passed popular policies and cannot be rightfully blamed for inflation and since Republicans are running on deeply

unpopular issues, the Democrats should win in a landslide victory.

But they won’t. In fact, it’s more likely that they will lose. This boils down to two simple factors: the mainstream media and structural biases against Democrats.

The media, including “liberal” news organizations, often publishes articles disadvantaging Democrats.

The attempted assassination of the Speaker of the House did not make the front page of The NewYork Times while 2017’s Congressional Baseball Shooting, where a GOP lawmaker was shot, did. Additionally, many voters think we are in a recession — despite there being no economic consensus on this position — due to the media’s communication on the issue.

Additionally, as a result of Republican gerrymandering and realities of the Senate, Democrats have to receive far more votes than Republicans to win majorities in the two chambers. In the Senate, small states have an advantage due to each state receiving two senators no matter the population. Small state bias allows for states with smaller populations to arrest the will of the majority of Americans. In cases such as climate change where progress is both necessary and popular but cannot get passed, this poses a threat to our democracy.

The numbers prove this anti-Democratic discrepancy. If Democrats score a 4 percentage point victory over Republicans, they still only have a 50-50 chance of keeping their majority and would likely lose the Senate

VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Voters are pictured casting their ballots at a local high school on Nov. 3, 2020. if they won 51% of the nationwide popular vote. The House has also been proven to be unfair to Democrats — with a consistent four- to six-point advantage for Republicans throughout the past 10 years. Redistricting has reduced this advantage, though it will likely still have a one to twopoint effect. We can visualize these discrepancies with this jaw-dropping figure: Democratic senators represent 41.5 million more people than Republican senators do, despite Democrats and Republicans being equally represented in the Senate.

Luckily, there are many solutions to fixing the structural biases that plague our governing institutions. First, we could pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act to end partisan gerrymandering and increase voter turnout. Second, we could make the Senate a fairer government body by granting Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico

statehood, which would give a vote to those whose voices are currently silenced. Finally, we could consider ways to make the House of Representatives more representative, such as James Madison’s proposed constitutional amendment capping the number of people within each district.

And while there is not much we can do to fix media bias, except perhaps go into media careers after graduation, voters must examine the facts present in elections and make logical choices based on them — not on the sensationalism present in the media and headlines. We need to recognize the powerful forces at play that are leading this election toward an outcome that does not represent the popular will of the people. We need to promote reforms to these flawed American institutions and vote for candidates who will fight for a fairer and more representative America.

12 Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Oliver Fox Sports and Society

Saving democracy with the New England Patriots

I

’m not going to say that the New England Patriots will swing the U.S. Senate. But I’m not not going to say that.

Ideally, millions of Americans will enthusiastically rush to the polls on Tuesday, armed with sophisticated and well-researched opinions, thoughtfully considering each candidate before ultimately coming to logically sound conclusions to receive their “I Voted” stickers to brandish proudly. Except they don’t do that, and the 2022 Midterm Elections — dubbed by many in the media to be the first line of defense against an

SPORTS ever-growing attack on American democracy — may be won or lost because of the outcome of a football game.

In 2010, a few political economists set out to prove an existentially terrifying reality: that the outcomes of football games — entirely irrelevant to the issues voters should be weighing — have a causal effect on voter behavior. They found, to my immense existential terror, that the incumbent candidate gains on average 1.5% more votes if a local team had recently won a game. If that win came on the eve of an election, that number could be as high as 3%.

I would like to think that Tuesday’s election is more important to me than whether the Patriots won or lost Sunday’s regular season game to the Indianapolis Colts. In the grand scheme of things, the outcome of the game does not matter, and Tuesday’s elections may have a cascading effect on hundreds of millions of Americans’ civil and reproductive rights — things worth protecting far more than the Patriots’ hopes for a Wild Card spot.

But I am an emotional creature and a Patriots fan — as are most of the one

tuftsdaily.com

million registered voters in the state of New Hampshire — and am apparently incapable of separating my feelings about the Patriots season from those about the state of the world. Thus, when faced with a critical Senate race in the Granite State, I am left to wonder if Bill Belichick’s brilliant defensive game plan and Rhamondre Stevenson’s inspired running, enabling a 26–3 victory over the Colts and saving the Patriots’ season, could also have saved democracy.

The Senate race in New Hampshire is, according to some recent polls, within the 1.5% margin. Democrat Maggie Hassan, the incumbent, has spent her campaign reassuring voters of her independence and bipartisan impulse, fighting off a serious challenge from Don Bolduc, an election-denying, pandemic-dismissing buffoon with no place in the U.S. Senate. Could the Patriots’ win have been the momentum swing Hassan needed? Have New Hampshire’s residents decided that, since the Patriots are over .500, there is not much need for a change in political leadership?

My sarcasm should not be mistaken for a lack of understanding. I concede that the Patriots’ blowout of the Colts will probably do very little to swing the New Hampshire election, but it will certainly have an effect, however minute.

I do, however, feel as though American politics wants nothing more than for me to look away. General wisdom seems to carry that our leaders are incompetent, our systems broken and our society unjust. I’m sure the voters in New Hampshire often want to look elsewhere too, and our eyes fell this weekend on Mac Jones’ solid — not spectacular or even necessarily encouraging — performance in the Patriots’ win. I don’t think his play has been perfect, or even all that good at spots, but I’m willing to give him another shot. However ludicrous, Hassan must channel the energy of Patriots nation, banking on New Hampshire’s voters giving her the same chance.

Oliver Fox is a sophomore studying history. Oliver can be reached at oliver.fox@tufts.edu.

TUFTS UNIVERSITY GRADUATE FAIR Monday, November 14 | 3 - 5pm Hall of Flags (160 Packard Avenue) Stop by anytime between 3 and 5pm to talk to representatives from Tufts’ graduate schools.

Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine The Fletcher School: A Graduate School of Global Affairs The Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy Gordon Institute Graduate School of Arts & Sciences Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences Public Health & Professional Degree Programs School of Dental Medicine School of Engineering Graduate Programs School of Medicine School of the Museum of Fine Arts University College