Tuf
Tufts Federalist Society hosts debate between Tufts professor and contributor to Project 2025
Among members of Gen Z, 41 million will be eligible to vote in the 2024 election. According to Alberto Medina, the communications team lead at Tufts’ Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, there is high
interest in voting from young people this year.
“Our survey at the very beginning of the cycle found that 57% of youth said they were extremely likely to vote,” Medina said. “Other polls that we’ve looked at and tracked throughout the cycle are similar. … Young people are interested, and
The Tufts Federalist Society held a debate on Oct. 24 focusing on whether Project 2025 — the Heritage Foundation’s 900-page blueprint for the next Republican president — is a threat to democracy. Jonathan Wolfson, a contributor to Project 2025 and the Chief
Hall and Matthew Sage Associate Editor and Managing Editor
Legal Officer and Policy Director at the Cicero Institute, and Samuel Gebru, Tufts professor of the practice of political science, argued for and against Project 2025, respectively. The conversation was moderated by senior and Federalist Society co-President Trent Bunker. Following introductions by Federalist Society co-President
João Ribeiro, each debater delivered opening remarks. In his opening statement, Gebru argued that Project 2025’s plans to centralize executive power, weaken the federal civil service and restrict access to voting all represent threats to democracy.
the Hill
Four years after 2020, the country is still reckoning with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the presidential election. Among those who experienced upheaval are government workers — despite the attention national candidates
attract, state and town employees often go unnoticed.
Samuel Gebru, a professor of the practice in the political science department at Tufts, noted that local civil employees are the ones responsible for solving day-to-day community issues.
Puerto Rico joke at Trump rally continues to spark backlash
see LOCAL WORKERS, page 2 see YOUTH, page 2 see FEDERALIST, page 3
Former President Donald Trump held a rally at Madison Square Garden on Oct. 27, featuring a long list of speakers, including Elon Musk, Rudy Giuliani, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Tucker Carlson and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. However, perhaps the most controversial speaker was Tony Hinchcliffe, a stand-up comedian who made a series of jokes ridiculing Palestinian, Jewish, Black and Latine voters. One of Hinchcliffe’s jokes, which identified Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” was met with swift backlash from both Democrats and Republicans, and the Trump campaign distanced itself from the comment, saying, “This joke does not represent the views of President Trump or the campaign.” In the wake of the rally, Vice President Kamala Harris has received endorsements from many notable Puerto Rican celebrities and new outlets. These endorsements could prove crucial in several key swing states, including Pennsylvania, which is home to nearly half a million Puerto Rican residents.
Harris makes surprise appearance on ‘Saturday Night Live’
Harris made a guest appearance on last weekend’s episode of “Saturday Night Live.” Harris played herself in the show’s cold open alongside comedian Maya Rudolph, who has played the vice president on “SNL” for years. This season, the show’s opening sketches have focused on the presidential election, with guest stars Andy Samberg,
Dana Carvey and Jim Gaffigan playing Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, President Joe Biden and Governor Tim Walz, respectively, all of whom made appearances in this week’s cold open. In this week’s sketch, Rudolph’s Harris gave herself a pep talk in the mirror as she prepared for a rally in Philadelphia, and the real-life Harris appeared as her mirror image as they gave each other words of encouragement. “Kamala, take my palm-ala,” Rudolph said to the real Harris. “The American people want to stop the chaos.” Fires damage ballots and ballot boxes in the Pacific Northwest
Law enforcement officials are investigating a series of incendiary attacks on ballot boxes in Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington, both suspected to be set by a single suspect on Oct. 28. The Portland fire, extinguished by an internal fire suppression system, damaged three ballots, while the Vancouver fire destroyed hundreds of ballots, according to officials. Roughly 500 of the Vancouver voters whose ballots were destroyed have requested replacement ballots. Investigators responding to both fires found devices at the scene marked with the words “Free Gaza.” In a third incident earlier this month, another device similar to those found at the fires was found on a third ballot box in Vancouver, marked with the words “Free Palestine.” Investigators are working to determine whether the attacks were motivated by pro-Palestine sentiments or rather by the desire to cause political strife just days before the election. While the incidents have fueled fears of election fraud, government officials and election experts have repeatedly defended the security of election systems.
Anika Parr Staff Writer
Amelia Sammons Contributing Writer
Aaron Gruen Executive Investigative Editor
KAITLYN WELLS / THE TUFTS DAILY
A polling site at Medford City Hall is pictured on Oct. 19.
Nate
CIRCLE analyzes youth voting data
YOUTH continued from page 1
they’re paying attention, and they want to participate in this election.”
Medina stressed the importance of the youth vote, since young voters can have a large impact on elections.
“Young people can, and often do, swing elections and have an impact in all kinds of races all across the country,” Medina said.
With the election rapidly approaching, Tufts students say they are both excited and nervous to see the results.
Some students, like first-year Emilia Ferreira, say they have been anticipating this moment since childhood.
“I’ve always been looking forward to voting,” Ferreira said. “I was the annoying kid who went into the poll with my mom and watched her vote, so I’m pretty hyped for it.”
Ferreira, who voted by mail in Massachusetts for both the presidential election and local elections, said the process of requesting and filling out her absentee ballot was “super easy.”
However, not every state makes the voting process so simple. While some states like Minnesota and Pennsylvania have made it easier to vote since 2022 through implementing policies like automatic voter registration, others have added restrictions that make the process more difficult. According to a study by CIRCLE, Florida, Nebraska, South Carolina, Ohio and Wyoming have all introduced new, strict photo-ID requirements ahead of the 2024 election.
CIRCLE’s study also found a correlation between youth voter turnout and states that have a vote-by-mail option. In 2022, Colorado, Oregon and Washington were three of the top seven states with the highest youth voter turnout in the 2022 midterm election. All have had vote-by-mail options since 2014 or earlier.
CIRCLE largely focuses on inequities and barriers to youth voting, according to Medina. He explained that the varying registration processes in each state are one major obstacle that young people face.
Seona Maskara, co-chair of JumboVote, says she has observed this among the Tufts students she works with.
“In states where the majority of the process is not online or where special procedures - like notariesare needed, students have a lot of trouble voting,” Maskara wrote in an electronic message to the Daily.
Other barriers for youth voters include access to educational resources about the process of getting registered, taking time off school or work if their state does not allow absentee voting and they need to go home to cast their ballots and transportation to the polls.
According to Medina, one misconception about youth voters is that they are all college students.
“More than a third of young people don’t have any college experience,” he said. “Those are some of the young people that have among the lowest rates of participation in elections, precisely because they’re often ignored,” he said.
CIRCLE ranks where youth voters are most likely to influence presidential, Senate and house elections across the country on their Youth Electoral Significance Index. Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are the three states where youth voters are predicted to have the greatest impact in the presidential race.
According to YESI, Michigan has one of the largest youth voter registration rates in the country and had a 36% youth voter turnout rate, the highest in the country, in 2022. The study states that these figures are largely due to laws Michigan has implemented to make registration easier, including automatic, online and sameday registration.
When it comes to the Senate, Montana, Ohio and Michigan are the states where youth voters are expected to have the largest impact, according to YESI. Texas is also on this list, ranking ninth. In the 2018 midterms, Montana had the second highest youth voter turnout and also offers same-day registration and no-excuse absen-
tee ballots. In Texas, 23% of residents are under the age of 30. Despite no laws in place that make it easier to vote, the state has high youth voter registration rates.
Some young people do not plan to vote in this election. Emma So, a first-year from New York City, said that encountering peers who did not want to vote was a “culture shock.”
“I’m in Philosophy Club and the first meeting was about voting, and there were two graduate students that were like, ‘I’ve never voted in any election. I’m not going to vote in this election,’ just for the idea that either their vote doesn’t matter or they don’t want their vote to change stuff in a negative way,” So said. Nevertheless, not only are Tufts students eager to cast their ballots, but many are hopeful about Gen Z and their ability to enact change.
First-year Madison Micale said, “People of our generation, I feel like they’re more apt to take a stand against something when they don’t like it.”
Four years later, pandemic still impacts election
LOCAL WORKERS continued from page 1
“The president of the United States does not fix your potholes and does not determine your curriculum,” Gebru said. “The most direct impact a government level could have — it’s local.”
losing their business and everything they had, and it’s a lot to carry with you,” Joseph Curtatone, who served as mayor of Somerville from 2004 to 2022, recalled.
for 18 years, and was ready for a change — he acknowledged the toll the public health crisis had.
office is
on the colonized land of the Massachusett people and within the territories of the Nipmuc and Wôpanâak (Wampanoag) tribes.
Questions? Concerns? The Tufts Daily is the entirely student-run newspaper of record at Tufts University in Medford, Mass. An editorially and financially independent organization, the Daily’s staff of more than 100 covers news, features, arts and sports on Tufts’ four campuses and in its host communities.
COVID-19 imposed a litany of new challenges on these workers.
“Government officials at the local level are already pretty strained,” Gebru continued. “You enter a global pandemic, that adds a whole different dimension.”
With more immediate problems to address — and fewer resources to tackle those problems — local government work is demanding. When accounting for low salaries, the job of local government employees becomes increasingly difficult.
Meredith McLain, an associate professor of political science at Tufts, noted that local governments already experience higher turnover rates than the federal government.
“State bureaucracies have a lot more turnover than the federal bureaucracy does, and that’s partially because state bureaucracies are very different in terms of protections,” McLain said, noting that state government workers have weaker protections and lower wages than federal employees. COVID-19 only compounded these issues.
“I was in my office by myself for months, and I’d be the one getting [constituents’] calls … who was getting sick, who was dying, who was
COVID-19 posed health and economic challenges; but with misinformation and increased politicization, government workers became overwhelmed.
“First, you already have a busy life as a local government official or as a state government official. Secondly, now you’re managing a global pandemic without any real leadership at the national level, then the third dynamic to all of this is the conspiracy theories,” Gebru said.
Among those most affected were election officials, who were burdened by an unprecedented amount of mail-in ballots and became the focus of former President Donald Trump’s campaign discrediting the integrity of the election.
Though election fraud is exceedingly rare in the United States, elections workers — many of whom are unelected — were suddenly thrust into the spotlight, receiving threats and attention unlike ever before.
“We’re seeing the doxxing of local and state officials. We’re seeing the harassment of not only them, but their spouses and/or their children,” Gebru said.
The pressure became overwhelming for many. Although Curtatone’s decision to step down was unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic — he had served as mayor
“You’re trying to do what’s best, keep your community healthy and safe … and then you see elected members in our society, or volunteers of different bodies of government being attacked or put in the crosshairs of political aim — that’s forced people out,” Curtatone said.
According to a CBS News investigation, over one third of top election officials nationwide have left their posts following the 2020 election. This increased turnover could coincide with the higher amount of intimidation and threats election workers have received in recent years.
“When we think about the level of harassment that election officials have received, particularly in the last four or five years, it’s no wonder that many of them have been fed up, have just said, ‘I’m done,’” Gebru said.
Since elections are administered at the state level, unelected federal employees have largely remained free from election-related harassment. But federal employee turnover could become an issue in 2025 if Trump is reelected.
“I think that if [Trump] is reelected, he will reinstitute Schedule F. The biggest concern there is that you have more people in positions of power who are not as well qualified as you would [have] under a civil servant system,” McLain said.
Schedule F, a rule instituted by executive order in Oct. 2020, stripped thousands of government worker positions of their civil servant protections. President Joe Biden reversed the decision in 2021, but Trump has vowed to restore his own power to “fire rogue bureaucrats.”
If Schedule F is reinstated, many policy-making jobs could be taken from experienced government employees and handed to political appointees.
“We know for a fact that political appointees have less expertise and they’re less effective at their jobs,” McLain said. “Part of this is because when you have a civil servant, they are naturally going to stay in office longer because they have these protections, and they’re not coming in and out with administrations. We want people to be in office longer because you gain expertise.”
In order to combat high turnover and burnout among government employees, Gebru recommended a multi-pronged approach involving civic education, higher wages and protections for workers. He also stressed the importance of recruiting more government workers.
“It’s important that we get a new generation of people in government,” Gebru said. “It’s important that we get their lived experiences, their professional experiences, their academic experiences in the decision-making process.”
NATALIE BROWNSELL / THE TUFTS DAILY The entrance to CIRCLE is pictured in Barnum Hall on Sept. 7, 2022.
Ben Adida, co-founder of VotingWorks, discusses importance of transparency in elections
Anika Parr Staff Writer
The Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life hosted a discussion titled “Voting Machines Everyone Can Trust,” led by Dr. Ben Adida, co-founder and executive director of VotingWorks on Wednesday. Adida spoke about the history of voting machines, current voting practices and his approach to building the next generation of voting machines.
After earning his Ph.D. from MIT’s Cryptography and Information Security Group, Adida spent 12 years managing various engineering companies, with a focus on security and privacy. Adida founded VotingWorks in 2018 as a nonpartisan nonprofit.
VotingWorks supplies the only open-source voting system used in the United States, meaning the software’s source code is publicly accessible on the VotingWorks website. The company’s voting technology has been adopted in several counties across Mississippi and New Hampshire, and its audit software is used in 10 states.
Adida opened his talk by reminding the audience that although voting technology can always be improved, the voting machines being used in this election are still secure.
“We don’t do that for any other technology. We don’t say, ‘Hey, my car has lane departure warnings. Well, that’s it. I can’t drive my car anymore,” he said.
Beginning conceptually, Adida posed the question: “What’s so hard about voting?”
“We need your individual vote to be a secret from everyone, but we also need the election results to be trusted by all citizens,” Adida explained. “That’s what makes voting so hard, trying to resolve those tensions.”
Adida then spoke on why voting machines are needed at all. He acknowledged that voters tend to have the most trust in hand-counted votes. However, he also explained that the lack of uniform contests on U.S. ballots makes voting machines necessary.
“Houston once had a 96-contest ballot, and so when you think about the combinatorics of counting paper ballots with 96 contests on them, you can start to see how that’s hard,” Adida explained.
Despite voting technology being necessary to mitigate the challenges of managing complex ballots, Adida maintained that paper ballots are still necessary.
“If the record of your ballot is electronic, … there’s some software between you and the official record of your vote,” Adida said. “The nice thing about a paper ballot, [besides] that it’s been checked by the voter, is it can be recounted and audited.”
After establishing a conceptual framework around voting, Adida pivoted to how VotingWorks machinery can help provide fair and trusted elections in the U.S.
He explained that paper ballots and tabulation audits are not enough to optimize election security and focused on three areas where voting practices could be improved: technology, physical security of voting machines and transparency.
Voting technology failures may go unnoticed if they do not significantly impact election outcomes. When failures are suspected, auditing allows for mistakes to be corrected. Adida argued that an over-reliance on audits is problematic.
“Two weeks later you’re gonna run an audit and go, oops, never mind, we had a silent failure and actually this person’s president now,” he said. “That’s unacceptable. Public trust would be shattered by a system like that.”
VotingWorks’ machinery solves this problem by detecting potential errors early. For example, if a VotingWorks ballot is altered, the unique hash of its QR code will be destroyed, resulting in the machine rejecting the ballot. This prevents the faulty ballot from being counted.
“You’re going to have failures in your system,” Adida said. “You should build a voting system such that when [things] happen, you catch it really early.”
VotingWorks technology also increases the physical security of voting machines. Adida explained how the machines are unlocked by something similar to a bank card in terms of security.
“Is it perfect? No,” Adida said. However, he said that quick security checks would allow them to place more trust in their voting system. “But [If I said], ‘Well, let me do this quick 30-second check on the machine [and it checks
Federalist Society debates Project 2025, the election
FEDERALIST continued from page 1
“There’s an unsettling reality with Project 2025. There’s this desire to centralize power in the hands of a few people in the executive branch, within the presidency. That screams authoritarianism,” Gebru said.
“In a democracy, particularly in a democratic republic like ours, we need to have a system of checks and balances.”
Wolfson countered Gebru’s remarks, arguing that Project 2025 does not threaten democracy and pointing out that every one of its proposals will still pass through checks and balances.
“I think it’s really important to recognize that in most of the cases, in most of the things people are pointing out about Project 2025, … the document itself cannot be a challenge to democracy if almost all of the things will have to go through the process that does itself have checks and balances,” Wolfson said.
One of the proposals of Project 2025 has been to turn apolitical, career roles within the federal government into politically-appointed positions. Gebru stressed the need to maintain an apolitical civil service in order to check presidential power within the executive branch.
“We do need a professional civil service that actually carries out the work of the country on a daily basis, that is not loyal to any party or any individual [and] that is loyal
to the people of the United States,” Gebru said.
Wolfson disagreed by arguing that civil service offices, although traditionally career roles, fall under the jurisdiction of the president, according to the Constitution. He pushed back on Gebru’s suggestion that the civil service holds an obligation to the public that is independent of the president’s directives.
“That concept doesn’t come from the Constitution,” Wolfson said. “That concept comes, literally, from people who just made that up because they like what the administrative state is doing. I can guarantee you that if the administrative state was out there saying ‘We’re going to ban abortion drugs because they don’t like them,’ people like [Gebru] would not be in favor of the administrative state.”
He emphasized that civil service officers lack public accountability, making it democratically problematic to continue granting them unchecked authority.
“The people have chosen the president. The people didn’t elect the ‘Associate Deputy Undersecretary of Transportation,’” Wolfson argued. “There’s no political accountability for those career paths.”
Gebru acknowledged that the president has some power to shape the executive branch, but expressed concerns about the implications of a unilaterally powerful president, particularly in light of for-
mer president Donald Trump’s statements about potentially using the Department of Justice to target political opponents.
“We cannot let individual presidents, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, weaponize the federal government and bend it to their political will,” Gebru said. “Yes, the president must set the direction of the executive branch … but we need to make sure that there are safeguards in place so that we don’t have an authoritarian presidency.”
In refutation of allegations claiming Project 2025 proposes a move towards authoritarianism, Wolfson reminded the room that Congress would still maintain its powerful checks on the president.
“Anything in the voting space that Project 2025 proposes would
out]’ you can be pretty confident you don’t have to trash that machine? Yes.”
The final issue addressed by VotingWorks machines is transparency. VotingWorks offers open-source code which means that their operating code and the names of engineers responsible for writing and approving each component are publicly available for inspection.
“I think of it like an open-kitchen restaurant,” Adida explained. “You walk in and you see the folks making your food. … Chances are they’re less likely to go from raw [meat] to cooked and back without cleaning their knives because people are watching. … There’s a bit of a higher bar that we hold ourselves to when we do our work in public.”
The demonstration of Adida’s machine showcased its exclusive card access, the ejection of faulty ballots and the ease of the machine’s operation. The audience enjoyed a short wait to submit their tester ballots due to the machine’s quick processing speed.
After the talk, the Daily spoke with Adida, who expressed optimism about the future of voting machines amid the heightened public scrutiny surrounding elections.
“We have to keep staying ahead,” he said. “It’s a process with absolute layers of defense, and each layer is imperfect, but together, it’s pretty hard for folks to hack the system.”
ligible, making increased security around elections necessary.
Bunker asked a question concerning Trump’s attempt to distance himself from Project 2025. He questioned if these attempts were disingenuous, considering the large overlap between Trump administration members and Project 2025 writers.
Wolfson maintained that overlap does not indicate that Project 2025 writers will have a monopoly over policy-making power in a second Trump administration.
have to pass in Congress, which I’m pretty sure is a pretty democratic process,” he asserted.
Gebru argued that Project 2025’s fixation on election security could lead to disenfranchisement of marginalized groups and is founded in a Trumpian conspiracy.
“[Project 2025] seeks to restrict access to voting by coming up with stumbling blocks like voter ID laws, limiting mail-in ballots, certain redistricting reforms,” he said. “President Trump and his supporters have made it seem in the last several years that there is a looming crisis to the integrity of our elections, and that’s just not true.”
Wolfson argued that voter fraud and election insecurity are serious issues in the American consciousness, even if their effects are neg-
“The president appoints about 4,000 people, so the fact that a couple hundred of them are part of a process doesn’t mean that that’s the overwhelming majority,” Wolfson argued.
After the event, Bunker and Ribeiro spoke with the Daily about the implications of the discussion and the motivations behind inviting Wolfson to speak.
“Ordinarily, you would think that speakers like him wouldn’t come to campus, but I think they are excited to come if the invite is extended,” Bunker said.
They both drew positive conclusions about the health of bipartisan civic life at Tufts from the event.
“I saw members of both Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans in the crowd, and everybody was respectful towards each other, and I think that’s a positive sign as we head into the presidential election,” Bunker said.
KAITLYN WELLS / THE TUFTS DAILY
Ben Adida speaks at Barnum Hall on Oct. 30.
COURTESY TUFTS FEDERALIST SOCIETY
The Tufts Federalist Society Project 2025 debate on Oct. 24 is pictured.
Residents of Medford, Somerville communities share thoughts on the 2024 election
Claire Wood Features Editor
Ahead of the 2024 election, the Daily sought to understand sentiments among local voters on all levels. Several locals were interviewed, and 68 people shared responses to a survey about the election. Respondents ranged in age from 18 to 83 and were students, teachers, union organizers and attorneys, to name a few professions.
Local Elections
Out of 68 survey respondents, only seven said they were most concerned with the outcomes of local elections as compared to state and national elections. However, many Medford and Somerville residents are still greatly concerned about their local ballot questions.
In Medford specifically, Questions 6, 7 and 8 have been of particular interest. Those are known as the “override” questions which, if passed, would each beget an override of state spending caps.
Maureen Curley, a retiree and longtime Medford resident, acknowledged a desire to improve funding for the city.
“There is a concerted effort to both take a look at how we can expand education and public works, which I think people are very interested in, making sure the streets are well traveled and repaired, as well as the fire [department],” she said.
Lynne Weiss, a writer and editor who has lived in Medford for 20 years, also noted the need for improved funding in Medford.
“Medford has been severely underfunded as a city for decades now,” she said. “I think it’s just crucial that we begin funding things at a level that will allow the community to thrive.”
Not all survey respondents felt the same way, with conservatives feeling uneasy about the overrides. One respondent feels polarization has resulted from the efforts of council members
Campaign signs are pictured in yards around Medford/Somerville.
who have been pushing to pass the overrides. These members are endorsed by Our Revolution, a national organization founded in the wake of Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign.
“For a city that has no political parties, the advent of the Our Revolution group has created a very large divide in Medford,” Medford local Dina Smith wrote.
While many Medford and Somerville residents are civically engaged, some struggle to feel well informed about their local elections.
Evan Becker, general manager of a local food and drink establishment, noted the difficulty of understanding local elections in both Medford and Somerville.
“I can doomscroll on the New York Times about what the f---’s going on in the national election every day, but finding out who the hell I should vote for city councilor or mayor, or what exactly the overrides or the ballot initiatives are going to do is really difficult to do, which feels like a consequence of the changing journalism landscape and no more local papers,” he said.
Weiss echoed this sentiment, noting the recent closure of several local news outlets.
“Lack of local news media is a problem; a lot of people have no idea what’s going on in the city,” she wrote.
State Elections
Only three survey respondents said they were most concerned with Massachusetts state elections.
However, the state ballot questions required deliberation for many residents.
“I love the state elections, the questions lead to so much more discussion and debate among residents. The changes feel tangible and like we are actually changing our state for the better,” Tufts student and Medford native Emma Maganzini wrote.
One such question has to do with the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, statewide standardized testing that Massachusetts students currently have to pass in order to graduate from high school. The decision to keep or remove that graduation requirement was challenging for Andrea, a longtime local of greater Boston.
“The [Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System], the state testing [requirement] for high school graduation, was of real interest,
because, while I’m very concerned about quality public education, I’m not sure the best way to achieve that,” she said.
Residents were also asked about the state ballot question about tipping and raising the minimum wage in tipping industries. Most of those surveyed did not express strong opinions about that particular question.
National Elections
Over 63% of survey respondents noted that they were most concerned with the national election. Being from the largely Democratic state of Massachusetts, many people interviewed expressed fear of another Trump presidency as well as anxiety about violence surrounding election results.
“We’ve never had somebody as blatant and as open talking about obliterating the Constitution or not being concerned about the rights of others. I think this is a real turning point for us,” Andrea said.
Survey respondent Bri Brothers expressed disdain for former President Donald Trump.
“I’m disgusted the race is this close when one of the candidates claims he’ll be a dictator on day
one. I’m worried for the future of my daughters,” she wrote.
82.4% of survey respondents said they will vote for Vice President Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz ticket in the upcoming election while 5.9% of respondents will vote for Trump and Ohio Sen. JD Vance. This data skews in favor of the Democratic ticket more than Massachusetts polling data as a whole.
Many interviewees acknowledged that the impacts of the election might not hit home here in Massachusetts the same way they might in different parts of the country.
Andrea acknowledged the ease of voting in Massachusetts.
“I think we live in a real bubble here. I love the bubble that we’re living in. But, I don’t know what’s happening in North Carolina because of the floods. I don’t know what’s happening on Native American reservations where there [are] limited locations to mail a ballot or even to vote,” she said. “You would think the goal in this country is to encourage people to vote. Why put roadblocks in people’s way?”
Becker acknowledged that more conservative states will likely continue to lose access to abortion and other reproductive rights.
“I worry for the people in red states who will be punished for this,” Becker said. He also acknowledged recent deaths that occurred following a lack of abortion care. “It’s already killing people.”
48.5% of voters surveyed feel either largely or somewhat pessimistic about the upcoming election. That said, local voters remain motivated to protect democracy. Andrea expressed a desire for younger generations to vote.
“Generation [Z] needs to carry us over the finish line. I am hoping that young people … really understand the imperative of this, of what this country is facing. This is not just another election.”
Josué Pérez contributed reporting.
The swing-state experience: How young Tufts voters are embracing their role in decisive elections
Assistant
Every four years, a spotlight beams upon a select few states that often determine the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. Seven battleground states will play a hand in deciding the fate of this year’s general election, including Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Voters from these states carry an immense burden, whether voting in person or thousands of miles away. Undergraduate students from these states, especially
those voting for the first time, face additional pressures. Tufts students Grant Pinsley, Sam Manasso and Harry Leibovich, all of whom are from swing states, described their experiences during election seasons. All three of them have already voted for Vice President Kamala Harris.
Pinsley, a first-year from Pennsylvania, provided an optimistic take on voting within a battleground state.
vote than most people, which I think is unfortunate and I think is incorrect, but it is the case.”
This is Pinsley’s first election. He said he understands the stress that comes with voting and the external pressures often put on young people.
Manasso, a sophomore from Georgia, is passionate about voting but misses being directly involved in her community.
ment with that of other Tufts students.
“Here, I feel the power of voting and being able to make a difference in that way, but … I feel weirdly disconnected from where I am [from],” Manasso said. “I feel more nervous about it because I can’t see what’s happening.”
“I take it as a privilege, in its own way, to be voting in a swing state,” Pinsley said. “I have a lot more power in my
“I think a lot of the anxiety around voting is a lack of knowledge or a perceived lack of knowledge, at least,” he said. “People [at Tufts] are generally passionate about voting; … it’s just a matter of how much information they have.”
Leibovich, a sophomore from Pennsylvania, expressed his excitement about voting while contrasting his active political involve -
“I purposely try to tune out … the drama of it all,” Leibovich said. Similar to many college students, Pinsley, Manasso and Leibovich all mailed in their ballots this year.
Leibovich and Pinsley did not face many restrictions when it came to mail-in voting.
“I’m also privileged enough to be from a swing state that is relatively open to mail-in votes,” Pinsley said.
Features Editor see SWING STATES, page 5
Dylan Fee
HELEN MCCARTY / THE TUFTS DAILY
How JumboVote has been preparing for the 2024 election
Ellora Onion-De Executive Features Editor
At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, founding father Benjamin Franklin was asked, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
“A republic, if you can keep it,” Franklin answered. Sacrosanct to a republic versus a monarchy is the right of citizens to vote. And it is this fundamental right that JumboVote has poured its efforts into, leading up to Election Day.
Founded in 2016 by Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life, JumboVote serves as the Tufts community’s nonpartisan voter engagement and voter education organization.
“Our mission … is to make voting easy, fun and accessible, and to empower people through knowledge, but not to shame people who can’t vote, and also to help people understand that voting is just one step that you can take,” JumboVote co-Chair Seona Maskara said.
Through partnerships with other entities, JumboVote has access to key administrative, informational and fiscal resources. Tisch College lends logistical support, especially with advice from Daniela Sánchez, the college’s senior program coordinator.
JumboVote is the Tufts chapter of the Andrew Goodman Foundation, a national nonprofit that funds civic engagement organizations at different universities. JumboVote also partners with TurboVote, a nonprofit website that provides voters with informational resources.
Teagan Mustone, the local outreach chair, noted that the past few months have been packed with JumboVote events.
“We’ve been canvassing and tabling since the first day Tufts students came,” Mustone said. “Now [it feels like] it’s events every day. I was tabling at the [Science and Engineering Complex] yesterday, trying to get engineering students energized and excited to vote.”
These tabling events have focused on helping students register to vote, answering questions about mail-in voting and providing information about local ballot questions.
Co-Chair Remy Bernatavicius spoke about the success of the club’s National Voter Registration Day program ming on Sept. 17.
“We had different tabling at Tisch [Library] and the [Mayer Campus Center] and Barnum [Hall], and we had different activities at each one. We had QR codes, we had websites, we had all these resources for people to register to vote and we reached so many peo ple,” she said. “That was one of the kickstart events of our semester that went really well.”
their ballots in the mailbox outside of Olin Center for Language and Cultural Studies.
Beyond these kinds of large events, JumboVote also held regular office hours, in which members provided witnesses and notaries, as some states require mail-in ballots to be notarized, and were available to answer any questions.
The club also focuses on issues local to Tufts’ host communities, particularly in Medford. As local
Education is a major aspect of JumboVote’s work. Maskara emphasized that the club aims to empower students not only through voting but also through other forms of civic engagement.
“We really encourage people to vote, but we also encourage people to stay on top of the media, watch the debates, watch everything. We encourage people to look into different systemic issues. We encourage people to contact their elected officials,” Maskara said.
Bernatavicius also described the Voting Party the club hosted on Oct. 15.
“We really centered that party on understanding that it’s important to care about local politics and to be educated,” she said. “We gave two presentations, one on Massachusetts ballot initiatives, and one on how to research your ballot.”
Some states require witnesses to sign the ballot in addition to the voter, so the club’s executive board acted as such for these students. At the end of the event, Bernativicius and others directed students to post
outreach chair and as a lifelong Medford resident, Mustone’s work centers around keeping Tufts students informed about the community.
“There are a large number … of Tufts students who are registered in Medford. So [we’re] trying to bridge that gap of the Medford students who are voting and the community itself,” Mustone said. “We did a presentation about ballot initiatives in Medford; there are a few very contentious ones, [so we’re] trying to educate students about [them].”
Students discuss voting in swing states
SWING STATES continued from page 4
In comparison, Manasso highlighted the difficulties that voters from Georgia must handle.
“For a lot of people, [Georgia has] a barrier: There’s an earlier deadline to register [and] it’s an earlier deadline to request your ballot,” Manasso said.
In addition to earlier deadlines, Georgia has created new ID requirements for mail-in ballots and shortened the runoff voting window. Other states with Republican-controlled legislatures have made similar restrictions.
Younger voters in these swing states are often scrutinized more closely, as 18–24-year-olds are known to
have lower voter turnout than other age groups.
Leibovich described his experience with older generations asking a younger person about voting.
“What I get is a scornful ask [of] ‘Did you vote?’ expecting [that] I didn’t,” he said.
Pinsley argued that because politicians cater to groups that show higher voter turnout, younger generations should vote more to gain more of a voice in policy making.
“At the end of the day, politicians understand that everything is a numbers game, and so if they see different numbers, they will react to that,” Pinsley said.
Manasso addressed the different mentalities of youth voters in different states and how sometimes people from a state that leans heavily towards one political party think that voting has less impact.
Manasso pushed back against the common sentiment that voting in states that typically lean red or blue matters less than in swing states.
“Even if you don’t feel like it’s important to vote in the national election — which I think it is — it’s so important
Although contacting elected officials may feel inaccessible for some, Maskara says that representatives often have phone numbers or email addresses constituents can use to contact them.
“If you get enough people to do that, if there’s a big enough movement, the elected official will take notice and change will happen,” Maskara said.
On Election Day, the club is focused on making sure students can get to the polls smoothly. JumboVote is providing rides from the Campus Center for Tufts students registered to vote in Medford/Somerville from 12–8 p.m. on an as-needed basis. They are also offering Lyft codes for $20 vouchers for students in Massachusetts to get to the polls. These codes can be accessed from the JumboVote Instagram.
Another part of the club’s Election Day efforts is coordinating student volunteers to be poll greeters.
“[The greeters] stand outside the polls and make sure that people are going to the right place. Oftentimes, with student registration, it can be really tricky to find out where you’re
to vote in local elections too because that’s affecting you,” Manasso said.
She also noted that certain federal policy changes on issues like abortion would have different effects on Massachusetts and Georgia, and that those differences can impact voters’ motivations.
“It kind of feels like the people here feel like the work is done and so there’s not as much urgency,” she said.
Pinsley agreed, emphasizing that people can make a difference at all levels, including local and national.
“It’s very rare to actually be in a place where you have no impact,” Pinsley said.
Manasso and Pinsley have taken their passion for voting outside the booth and into their communities. Even before they were able to vote, both participated in text and call banks and did in-person canvassing to promote candidates in local, state and national elections.
Pinsley said that the work he has done has been difficult but rewarding.
“It’s definitely empowering. It’s pretty grueling, but that is how you make change,” he said. “It’s hard, but it’s always
supposed to go, because … Tufts is half in Medford, half in Somerville,” Maskara said. “Those poll greeters have the Tufts lawyers’ contact information … to make sure that people aren’t being actively disenfranchised on Election Day.”
The day ends with the Election Night Extravaganza, an event for students in the Joyce Cummings Center that JumboVote is co-sponsoring.
“You’ll be able to watch the polls with other people; there will be food,” Maskara said. “If that stresses you out, and that’s not the way you want to engage with the election, you don’t have to. I feel like there’s no bad way to engage with the election. We’re just providing one option.”
Looking ahead to the post-election period, the club hopes to keep students educated about issues in Congress, plan for the 2026 midterm elections and develop plans for target audiences.
“I think we’re going to try to focus more on engineering students or STEM students, because they are the ones with the lowest voter turnout,” Mustone said.
After months of intense involvement, the JumboVote leaders feel proud of the work they’ve done.
“I’ve noticed that people on campus really are talking about voting. … I think that we have been able to provide [resources],” Maskara said. “We have our email inbox, we have our social media, we have our office hours and we’ve seen people come with questions that we have been able to answer. And … through tabling, I feel like we’ve reached hundreds of people on this campus.”
GRAPHIC BY ALEXANDER STONE
hard to make change. But the more people that do it, the easier it gets.”
On campus, these students have different approaches when it comes to having conversations with their peers about voting.
“I personally don’t want to jeopardize my personal relationships with somebody else because of … who or what they vote for,” Leibovich said.
Pinsley somewhat agreed with the idea that he would rather get people to vote than convince them who to vote for.
“The reason why young people aren’t paid attention to or taken seriously is because we don’t vote,” Pinsley said.
Manasso narrowed it down to a few main arguments that she would make to a peer if they were unsure about voting.
“[I would] deconstruct the idea of voting, … [letting people] know that there’s a lot of information out there that’s easily consumable,” Manasso said. “I [would] think a lot about … my life, and what I like about it and the people that I love and the way their lives would be changed — even if [my vote] wouldn’t affect me directly.”
Sorsha Khitikian Contributing Writer
When I was eight years old, I accompanied my grandpa (Papa) to the polls for the 2012 general election. This was the first time I ever “voted.” I remember watching him get his ballot and going with him into the voting booth. He had a list with him of the candidates he wanted to vote for. However, once he got to the local elections, he started asking me which name looked better. Whichever name I said, he voted for.
Now that I am voting in my first election, I’ve been thinking about that day. My papa, at some point, stopped knowing who he wanted to vote for and did not care to learn, trusting my eight-year-old self to make as good of a decision as his 62-year-old brain. I honestly don’t blame him. As a Los Angeles county voter, my ballot this election cycle is nothing less than daunting: four pages, 13 ballot propositions (one local, two county, 10 state), three local elections, six county elections, the presidential election, and I even had to vote for Adam Schiff twice (once to fill the rest of Diane Feinstein’s term, once for the normal six years as senator). That’s 25 different things to vote for. I was seriously tempted to play “Eeny,
OPINION
VIEWPOINT
Your ballot is biased, and it’s your fault
meeny, miny, moe” to choose some of those candidates, just to make my life easier.
The reality about voting is that people get tired. People get frustrated. People stop paying attention. I get it. The problem, though, is that we’ve normalized this type of voting behavior in our country. When we celebrate two-thirds of eligible voters turning out as the highest in over 100 years, that’s not something to be proud of.
What makes it even worse is that decades worth of election literature shows that voters’ lack of stamina doesn’t just lead to low voter turnout — it actually biases our ballots. Since the 1990s, researchers have reliably found that voters go through “cognitive fatigue,” where people get so bogged down with information that they process slower, shorten their attention spans and become unfocused. When this happens, voters tend to experience a name-order effect: They are more likely to vote for whichever candidate’s name is written first. This effect is higher when a race does not have much media attention and when voters are less partisan, which means that state and local elections exhibit this effect more. When studied in primary elections, the name-order effect was large enough to affect the
results of multiple races. In other words, some candidates may have actually won elections because their name was listed first on the ballot. Our voter laziness has the potential to bias a result so much that a candidate will win for that reason alone.
Similar effects have been found with ballot propositions. Researchers in the early 2000s found that the farther down a proposition appears on a ballot, the more likely it is that a person will not vote on it. Not only that, but the lower a ballot initiative is, the higher percentage of “No” votes it receives. The reason? Cognitive fatigue. This study, along with the previously mentioned primary election study, was conducted in areas where ballot orders are randomized by assembly district or precinct, which should minimize ballot bias. Yet, ballot bias effects still impact the results of elections.
Simply put, when voters are tired and don’t know who or what they want to vote for, they bias their ballots. They are more likely to vote for the first candidate they see, they are more likely to vote no on propositions and they are more likely to skip races. This is unacceptable.
The recent surge in absentee voting may be helping to lessen voter fatigue. With absentee bal-
VIEWPOINT
lots, voters have more time to understand their ballots, do their research and make informed decisions. Thirty six states now allow absentee ballots without an excuse, eight of which conduct their entire elections with mail-in ballots as the primary avenue. As previously mentioned, randomized ballots are expected to lessen name-order effects, so some states have chosen to implement this process. Unfortunately, neither of these fixes address the root of the ballot bias problem.
The simplest (albeit the most time consuming) way to de-bias your ballot is to do your research. Learn a little about each candidate, even though it might take you four hours (like it did for me). Find what rating the Bar Association gave for that random judge seat on your ballot. Yes, this takes an annoying amount of effort, but it is vital to our democracy. Now, your job is to go learn about your candidates. Learn about your ballot measures. Make an educated decision, not one based on “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.” It’s time to get out there and make an informed vote.
It’s not complicated
America has a problem with passivity. It’s not the kind of passivity that prevents us from responding to threats — many attacks on our country are met with a disproportionate, violent response. American passivity has to do with an unwillingness to address (or even acknowledge) injustice, especially the type of injustice that benefits those in charge.
Looking away from problems is a core principle of the American experiment. If 246 years of slavery isn’t enough to prove this, consider the following century of discrimination against Black Americans. Despite protests, speeches and hundreds of thousands of Americans marching in support of equal rights, it took until the 1960s for these rights to be legally recognized.
American passivity has not gotten better with time. Perhaps the most recognizable issue that demonstrates this passivity is climate change. The Earth’s temperature has risen by 1.2 degrees Celsius since the 1800s, and will rise by 3.1
degrees Celsius by the end of the century if we don’t take action. The effects of climate change are already here: stronger and deadlier hurricanes, droughts, heat waves and rising sea levels. All of these changes are already affecting billions of people, but we haven’t done nearly enough to avoid the worst impacts yet to come.
The United States in particular is one of the biggest offenders in the climate crisis. In 2017, former President Donald Trump withdrew the country from the Paris Agreement, which was arguably the most important international legislative effort to combat climate change. In his statement on withdrawing from the accord, Trump claimed that the economic cost of slowing global warming was not worth it.
Many opponents of climate legislation often take this position.
A popular article in the conservative magazine National Affairs claims that dealing with climate change is a “complex question,” and should be left to the private sector (i.e., the government should let the free market take care of it).
The narrative that climate change is a “complicated” issue has been meticulously crafted by corporations seeking to avoid regulation. The idea behind it is simple: If Americans believe an issue is complicated, they will avoid addressing it.
The phrase “It’s complicated” is inherently dismissive. It’s used in conversation to avoid further explanation, or to explain one’s position on an issue without having to justify it. “It’s complicated” is especially effective as an argumentative tactic. If you disagree with someone, but don’t actually have any evidence to back it up, making the issue seem complicated is the perfect response — it immediately makes your opponent’s argument seem simple and naive.
Perhaps the most well known use of the phrase comes from people justifying Israel’s operation in Gaza. With over 40,000 Palestinians dead in addition to credible allegations of war crimes, supporters of Israel’s operation are faced with the difficult task of defending the continuation of a slaughter. Unsurprisingly, the most popular
way to do so is to simply dismiss the conversation entirely.
There are a couple obvious reasons why Israel is not ending their assault: Around 60 Israeli hostages are still living in captivity, Hamas has not been entirely eradicated and the assault itself has led to increased hostility from neighboring countries. However, while these issues are enough to claim the issue is “complicated,” they are not nearly enough to justify the 130 people killed per day on average in Gaza.
While the situation may seem complicated, the reality is simple. Tens of thousands of people have died, most of whom are non-combatants. The United States is sending billions of dollars to Israel and is
Israel’s biggest source of arms, both of which continue to contribute to an unprecedented civilian death rate. Cutting off this funding would cripple Israel’s ability to continue their assault, thereby crippling their ability to kill civilians. Preventing civilian deaths is as simple as choosing to spend billions of American tax dollars elsewhere.
“It’s complicated” is the perfect encapsulation of American passivity. It allows everyday citizens to look away from injustice without thinking about it and allows politicians to support atrocities without having to justify them. It’s one of the most powerful phrases of our time, but it’s also one of the weakest things one can say.
The Tufts Daily is a nonprofit, independent newspaper, published Monday through Friday during the academic year, and distributed free of charge to the Tufts community. The content of letters, advertisements, signed columns, cartoons and graphics does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Tufts Daily editorial board.
EDITORIALS: Editorials represent the position of The Tufts Daily Editorial Board. Individual editorialists are not necessarily responsible for, or in agreement with, the policies and editorials of The Editorial Board. Editorials are submitted for review to The Tufts Daily Executive Board before publication.
VIEWPOINTS AND COLUMNS: Viewpoints and columns represent the opinions of individual Opinion editors, staff writers, contributing writers and columnists for the Daily’s Opinion section. Positions published in Viewpoints and columns are the opinions of the writers who penned them alone, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Daily itself. All material is subject to editorial discretion.
OP-EDS: Op-Eds provide an open forum for campus editorial commentary and are printed Monday through Thursday. The Daily welcomes submissions from all members of the Tufts community; the opinions expressed in the Op-Ed section do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Daily itself. Opinion articles on campus, national and international issues should be 600 to 1,200
in length and submitted to opinion@tuftsdaily.com. The editors reserve the right to edit letters for clarity, space and
appear in the Daily. Authors must submit their telephone numbers and day-of availability for editing questions.
ADVERTISEMENTS: All advertising copy is subject to the approval of the editor in chief, executive board and business director.
Rory Myers Staff Writer
GRAPHIC BY JAYLIN CHO AND GRETTA GOORNO
GRAPHIC BY SHANNON MURPHY
Democrats
BATTLE FOR THE SENATE: NINE KEY RACES
Independents The Senate BEFORE the Election
Thirty-four Senate seats are up for grabs today. Democrats currently hold a slim majority in the Senate, where they sit in seven of the nine most competitive seats. Democrats must win seven of these seats and the presidency in order to achieve a majority.
Tossups
Debbie Stabenow, the 74-year-old senior Senator from Michigan, announced that she would not run for reelection early last year, leaving the seat she has held for decades open in a critical swing state. Unsurprisingly, the race between Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D) and former Rep. Mike Rogers (R) has been competitive, with polls giving only a slight edge to Slotkin. Perhaps appealing to Michigan’s partisan divisions, both candidates have historically taken moderate policy positions. However, it does not seem this strategy is tenable for either candidate. Slotkin has condemned progressive Democrats like Michigan congresswoman Rashida Tlaib for calls to end military aid to Israel, which may alienate the sizable Arab population in the Detroit area. Meanwhile, Rogers, who has publicly condemned former President Donald Trump as recently as 2021, has reversed his criticism of Trump after gaining his endorsement, which Slotkin has publicly attacked him for. It is an open question of which candidate’s decision to side with a certain faction of their party will cost them the election.
Independents The Senate Election Predictions
Republicans
Sherrod Brown has served as a Senator from Ohio since 2007 and is a rarity as a statewide elected Democratic official in the state of Ohio. Although Ohio was once a swing state, it has become solidly Republican in recent years. Bernie Moreno was born in Bogotá, Colombia and was involved in the car dealership business prior to his political career. While Moreno can capitalize on the popularity of Donald Trump in Ohio, Brown will have to rely on ticket-splitting voters to win his Senate race. Brown hopes to court these voters through his reputation as an economic populist who supports the interests of working class people. Polls on the race are mixed, and the margin of victory will likely be extremely thin regardless of who wins.
Democrats
Independents
Until recently, Democratic incumbent Bob Casey held a steady lead over Republican challenger David McCormick. However, in the final stretch leading up to the election, this Pennsylvania Senate seat has become a toss-up. Casey is a lawyer and politician who has served as a Pennsylvania Senator since 2007, and McCormick is a businessman who has put more than $4 million of his own money into his campaign throughout the race. In an effort to appeal to undecided voters, Sen. Casey aired a campaign ad in October that promoted instances where he sided with Trump. McCormick threatens the Democrats’ narrow 51–49 majority.
Popular Democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin is running for a third term against Republican Eric Hovde, a businessman who previously ran for Senate in 2012. This is a must-win seat for Democrats as they seek to retain their majority, and polls show that Baldwin has the advantage here. Although Wisconsin is a swing state at the federal level, no Republican has won this Senate seat since 1952. However, Hovde has improved in the polls in recent weeks, suggesting that this may be Baldwin’s closest Senate race yet.
Lean Republican
Incumbent Democrat Jon Tester, the senior U.S. Senator from Montana since 2007, is facing an uphill battle against Republican challenger Tim Sheehy, a former Navy SEAL from Minnesota. Tester has prided himself on his connections to the state as a third-generation Montana farmer and school teacher, but he may be unable to overcome conservative headwinds, as he is the only remaining Democrat who holds statewide office in Montana. The race has been defined by the candidates’ connection to the state, with Tester criticizing Sheehy as an out-of-stater who doesn’t understand Montana values. Sheehy is currently leading in most polls by about a seven point margin, and is generally expected to win, but the race remains competitive.
— Nicholas Prather
Nebraska Sen. Deb Fischer, a Republican who has served for two terms, is in a contentious race against Dan Osborn, a former union leader and U.S. Navy veteran who is running as an independent. The Senate race in Nebraska has become one of the closest in the country, with a recent New York Times/Siena College Poll showing Fischer at 48% and Osborn trailing just two points behind. Since Osborn has not said which party he will caucus with on Capitol Hill, his victory would not automatically grant the seat to Democrats, but would still represent a critical loss for Republicans.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, famed for his 2016 presidential run and criticism by liberal media, faces a tight campaign for reelection against Democratic Rep. Colin Allred. Cruz has faced an image problem in recent years, which worsened in his last term. With Texas’ population becoming more Democratic amid a nationwide migration to the Sun Belt, many experts believe Cruz’s chances of a third term are in jeopardy. Cruz’s opponent, Rep. Colin Allred of Texas’ 32nd district, seeks to exploit this vulnerability and become the first Black Senator in state history. However, Texas is still firmly a conservative bastion, and Cruz has taken a narrow polling lead. Nevertheless, if Allred is able to seal a victory against Cruz, it could mark the beginning of the end of Republican political dominance in Texas.
Lean Democrat
Incumbent Sen. Jacky Rosen, a Democrat elected in 2018, is facing a strong challenge from Republican Sam Brown, a retired Army captain and political newcomer who has gained traction with Nevada’s conservative base. Both candidates are targeting key constituencies in the state, including Latine voters and union workers. Although Sen. Rosen has a fundraising edge and leads in most polls, Nevada’s status as a battleground state means this race could come down to the wire.
Incumbent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who was elected as a Democrat in 2018, left the Democratic Party in 2022 and announced her retirement from the Senate earlier this year. Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego, who currently represents most of Phonenix in Arizona’s 3rd district, is facing off against Republican Kari Lake, a former news anchor and Trump loyalist who narrowly lost the governor’s race in 2022. The race to replace her is one of the tightest in the country — Representative Gallego has the advantage here, as he has consistently held a large fundraising advantage and currently leads by several points in the polls, but Arizona’s swing state status means that the race is likely to be very close.
— Estelle Anderson
— Nate Hall
— Zach Halverstam
— Estelle Anderson
Michigan
Ohio Pennsylvania
— Zach Halverstam
— Maxwell Shoustal
— Julieta Grané
— Nate Hall
Wisconsin
Electoral Map
As of Nov. 4, former President Donald Trump is projected to win 218 electoral votes, with 70 of those votes leaning towards him. Vice President Kamala Harris is projected to win 227 electoral votes, with 36 of those votes leaning towards her. Seven swing states, which make up the remaining 93 electoral votes, are considered “toss-ups.” For more detailed coverage on states to watch, see page 10.
WISCONSIN
NEVADA
Trump 47.7%
Harris 47.4%
ARIZONA
Trump 48.9%
Harris 46.8%
Harris 48.3%
Trump 47.3%
Data from FiveThirtyEight
MICHIGAN
PENNSYLVANIA
NORTH CAROLINA
GEORGIA
STATES TO WATCH PENNSYLVANIA
Pennsylvania’s history of switching between political parties makes it a critical state this year. President Joe Biden won the state in 2020 by less than 1.2%. Polling indicates that this state is even, leaning neither red nor blue. An average of Pennsylvania polling data showed a 0.2% lead in favor of former President Donald Trump, with statistics showing 47.9% for Trump and 47.7% for Vice President Kamala Harris as of yesterday. Geographically, approximately two-thirds of voters in large cities support Harris, and two-thirds of rural voters support Trump. However, suburban areas in Pennsylvania continue to be a close battle, with 49% of voters supporting Harris and 47% supporting Trump. Projections indicate that election results for Pennsylvania will take longer than election night since election workers are not allowed to process mail ballots until Election Day.
NORTH CAROLINA
While North Carolina is a battleground state, it has only turned blue once since 1980, in the 2008 election. Trump narrowly took the state in 2020 by 1.3%, his smallest win in any state, and may have a slight edge over Harris in the upcoming election. A large Democratic turnout in Raleigh, Asheville and Charlotte is necessary for Harris to contend the state this election; however, her ability to cut into red areas that surround dense blue cities may be the deciding factor. While Hurricane Helene has devastated much of the western part of the state, it has seen the highest early voting turnout in the country, with 43% of eligible voters having voted by Oct. 30. The state will inevitably be a tight race, with its 16 electoral votes likely to be decided on election night.
WISCONSIN
Wisconsin, a traditionally “blue wall” state, has emerged as a swing state after Trump’s upset win in 2016 and Biden’s narrow win in 2020. Currently, the state is a pure tossup. The FiveThirtyEight polling average has Harris leading by 1.1%, and the RealClearPolitics polling average has Harris up by 0.4%. For Harris, victory lies in turning out the Democratic cities of Madison and Milwaukee, along with improving numbers with college-educated white voters. For Trump, maintaining strong appeal in the rural areas of the state coupled with slight improvements in urban areas could lead to a win. Voter participation in Wisconsin is expected to be high — in 2020, 84% of voters turned out. This combination of razor-thin margins and high turnout indicates Wisconsin is likely to be called either late on Election Day or early morning on Wednesday.
MICHIGAN
Recent polling in the battleground state of Michigan from Marist College and FiveThirtyEight puts Harris 3% and 1% ahead of Trump, respectively. Despite Democrats’ trifecta in the State House, State Senate and governorship, Michigan has been considered a tossup state since 2016 when Trump narrowly defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the state — Biden successfully flipped the state back to the blue column in 2020. Harris’ path to a Michigan victory includes Arab Americans, a demographic she has struggled to connect with this election over the war in Gaza. Michigan is the birthplace of the “Uncommitted Movement,” whose demands include an immediate ceasefire and an arms embargo to Israel. Members of the movement threaten to withhold their votes for Harris if she does not pledge to work towards their demands, which could be costly for her in Michigan. Recent measures passed in Michigan that allow mail-in ballots to be processed before Election Day and increased early voting means results will likely be called the day after the election.
ARIZONA
Democrats have chipped away at Republican control of Arizona since the early 2000s. In 2020, by only 0.3%, Biden became the first Democrat to win the state since former President Bill Clinton in 1996. In 2022, Democrats largely swept statewide elections, winning races for senate, governor, attorney general and secretary of state. Trump maintains a slight lead, though most polls remain within the margin of error. He currently leads by 3% in The New York Times’ polling average. The growing political diversity of Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa County, which narrowly went blue in 2020, has made the statewide race more competitive. Latines are expected to be a key demographic with 1.3 million eligible voters, making up roughly 25% of the state’s electorate. Abortion access will be on the ballot and could potentially galvanize turnout for Harris. Arizona’s results are expected to take days due to lengthy ballots, a high number of mail-in ballots and new rules regarding their processing.
GEORGIA
Despite being a traditionally red state, Georgia swung blue for the 2020 presidential election for the first time in thirty years. Currently, Trump is beating Harris by a slim margin with their numbers at 48.6% and 47%, respectively, as of Friday. Key voting groups in Georgia include suburban/rural, young and Black voters. Suburban women in Georgia have begun leaving the Republican party after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Black male voters tend to have strong leanings toward the Democratic party; however, the Harris campaign still needs to win over voters in suburban and rural Georgia to turn the state blue this year. Election results are expected to be released and certified by Nov. 12 at 5 p.m.
NEVADA
With just six electoral votes, the Silver State holds an important role in this election. In Nevada, which went blue in the last four presidential elections, voter registration is nearly evenly split, with a significant number of voters registered as “nonpartisan.” The state still hasn’t fully recovered from the pandemic-caused drop in the economy, and with an economy heavily reliant on the leisure and hospitality industry, Nevada’s unemployment rate is at a high 5.4%. One measure proposed by Trump on this issue is a “no tax on tips” policy, which Harris’s campaign has also endorsed. While some polls predict a roughly even split between Trump and Harris, others indicate a slight edge, from one to six percentage points depending on the poll and date, in Trump’s favor. Initial election results are expected on Election Day.
— Michael Onysko
— Josh Solomon
— Eli Brigham
— Shayna Levy
— Julian Glickman
— Hannah Rajalingam
— Varya Karpinskaya
The Democratic coalition is fracturing. Is there still hope to save it?
Evan Wang Opinion Editor
Regardless of who wins today’s presidential election, the Democratic Party needs to do some serious soul-searching on their handling of this election cycle. Kamala Harris is the current vice president, a former California senator and a former prosecutor. Her Republican opponent, former President Donald Trump, is a race-baiting, idiotic and egotistical man who continuously spews conspiracy theories out of his mouth. Yet, the race is somehow tied, with Republicans predicted to sweep both chambers of Congress. How could this possibly be happening?
In the end, it all comes down to the demographics of the voters supporting both candidates. The Democratic coalition, encompassing racial minorities, working-class white people and youth voters, has largely lasted from since President Franklin Roosevelt formed the New Deal coalition to the present day. This bloc allowed former President Lyndon Johnson to dominate the 1964 election, winning modern-day red states like Kansas and Idaho easily. It was the same coalition that also allowed both former President Barack Obama and President Joe Biden to win the presidency in 2008 and 2020, respectively. However, this once-powerful coalition is now crumbling apart without redress.
Even compared to recent Democratic presidents, Harris is
Reya Kumar
Reya Kumar (LA’24) is a former executive opinion editor of the Tufts Daily.
Mere weeks before the 2024 election, several major newspapers, including The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times, have announced that they will not be endorsing a presidential candidate this cycle. This flies in the face of tradition for both of these widely read publications and was met with consternation and resignations from their own organizations. Both decisions came directly from the billionaire owners of the respective papers after endorsements for Vice President Kamala Harris had been drafted by their editorial boards. Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong claimed that this choice was made because he was afraid to “add to the division.” Jeff Bezos, owner of the Post, stated in an op-ed that his “principled decision” was intended to restore public trust in the news media.
If anything, these publications have lost public trust. On the one hand, a presidential endorsement from either would likely do little to swing the needle. Both fall solidly in the “skews left” section of the media bias chart — few would assume that either would endorse former President Donald Trump over Harris anyway. In fact, many major newspapers have stopped endorsing presidential candidates
doing remarkably poorly among the demographics that brought Obama and Biden to victory. When it comes to minority voters, Obama won 95% of Black voters and 67% of Hispanic voters in 2008. Harris is currently polling at 81% and 52% respectively — a nearly 15-point drop among both minority groups. Trump’s Black support has increased from 9% to 15% since 2020, clawing at a pillar of support that Democrats have long depended on to win elections. Among young voters, particularly young men, Harris is doing equally as poorly. Polls regularly show Harris winning young women by 30% or more but barely leading among young men.
Harris is doing the worst among working-class voters, which used to be one of the strongest bases of support for the Democratic Party. In polling from August 2008, Obama was leading polling 45% to 43% against Republican former Senator John McCain for Americans without a college degree. In contrast, recent polls found Harris down by at least 12 points, a 10-point drop compared to Obama. In September, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which has endorsed every Democratic presidential candidate since the 1990s, refused to back Harris. The Teamsters Union, which boasts some 1.3 million members, conducted its own polling and found that support for Harris is lagging by huge margins. Before Biden dropped out, union
Democracy
over the past 20 years. However, the last-minute nature of these decisions has stood out, especially considering the assault on democratic norms by one of the candidates.
Robert Greene, an author and former Times editorialist who quit over the non-endorsement decision, published a piece in The Atlantic calling the non-endorsements of Harris in the eleventh hour from two publications that have long been reporting on Trump’s unfitness “plain cowardice.”
Endorsements are more than tradition; they represent informed opinions based on years of reporting from outlets that many Americans do trust, particularly at a time when misinformation runs rampant on social media.
members supported him over Trump by eight points. However, when union members compared Harris to Trump, she lost by over 25 points. The Teamsters are also not the only union refusing to endorse Harris. At the start of October, the International Association of Fire Fighters, which has 300,000 members, also decided to sit this election out.
It is clear that the Democrats’ strategy is failing. Yet, Harris is plowing full speed ahead, seemingly oblivious to it all. Peek at a liberal messaging board like the comment section under The New York Times and you’ll find it awash with finger-pointing and anger directed at so-called “right-wing pundits,” biased news sources and self-centered voters. When talking about Trump himself, all semblance of civility goes out the window, with labels flying all over the place. Democrats have deemed Trump a fascist, a danger to democracy and compared him to Hitler.
Guess what? Nearly half of Americans are likely going to vote for Trump. This is not because a majority of them would like to live in Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy. They are choosing Trump anyway because he understands their grievances and the hypocrisies of the Democrats. When Americans watched Harris get coronated as the new nominee within days after Biden was pushed out of the race, that doesn’t scream a
really
shining beacon of democracy. When Harris announces herself as a change candidate, but then states that she doesn’t know a thing she would change about Biden’s policies in an interview, how can she possibly pretend she has a coherent position? Some non-white voters are tired of the Democratic Party’s focus on continuously hammering racial differences without delivering on bread-and-butter issues. When members of the working class are continuously lectured about their white male privilege, they will simply stop supporting the Democratic Party. Young men are also no longer content being
does die in darkness
ing neutral in any other before this and that Jan. 6, as well as Trump’s open admission of further plans to undermine and subvert our democracy, are not uniquely disqualifying is unbecoming of such major publications. With our democracy at stake, neutrality is complicity. The Post’s slogan, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” was used by Bezos in
improperly to seek retribution on those who have wronged him, as Trump himself has indicated he will do. They are bending to his will before he’s even won the election — giving Trump an excuse to claim that these generally left-leaning publications specifically don’t trust Harris.
“ENDORSEMENTS ARE MORE THAN TRADITION — THEY REPRESENT INFORMED OPINIONS BASED ON YEARS OF REPORTING FROM OUTLETS THAT MANY AMERICANS DO TRUST, PARTICULARLY AT A TIME WHEN MISINFORMATION RUNS RAMPANT ON SOCIAL MEDIA”
In only the fifth presidential endorsement of its 167-year run, The Atlantic explained that they are endorsing Harris as she “believes in the freedom, equality, and dignity of all Americans” and “believes in democracy,” in contrast to her opponent. To me, these qualities represent the lowest bar necessary to run our nation.
To pretend that remaining neutral in this election is akin to remain-
2016, who added that “certain institutions have a very important role in making sure that there is light.” This week, he prevented his own newsroom from shining that light on a presidential candidate who is as anti-democratic as we’ve had.
Soon-Shiong and Bezos are most certainly trying to hedge their bets with a candidate they believe will use his office
While the high-profile non-endorsement decisions this week are troubling, they are part of a trend towards fewer endorsements in local and state elections. Earlier this year, The New York Times ended endorsements in local elections, drawing ire from local subscribers. Though this made fewer headlines, I believe that this is an even graver mistake than the one made by the LA Times and the Post. When newspapers stop running local endorsements, readers lose an informative tool that can help them decide on issues or candidates they know little about and may have little time to do in-depth research on. If robust and reliable newspapers continue to end endorsements, I
ignored by the Democratic Party. Most of Harris’ appeal to the youth has been aimed at young women, which explains why she does so poorly among young men. The Democratic coalition is collapsing, but it is not too late to pull out the flex tape. The party must redirect its attention back to working-class Americans and deliver on everyday economic issues instead of bickering over empty talking points. The New Deal coalition is not yet lost as long as Democrats are willing to fight for the hearts and minds of Americans, and they could return to the electoral dominance they once enjoyed.
fear that many more Americans will be forced to turn to unreliable sources such as social media to fill the void, or they may not even bother voting in smaller races, which can be more consequential to their lives than the ones at the top of the ticket.
I relied heavily on reporting and endorsements — which are not only opinions but carefully constructed arguments for or against a candidate or ballot measure based on rigorous reporting — from the LA Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and The Mercury News of San Jose when I voted last week. These are publications I have been reading for years and trust. I have since lost some trust in the LA Times knowing that their endorsements are not based only on factual reporting and the analysis of a thoughtful editorial board but are also beholden to the whims of their billionaire owner.
I thank the Daily for their guide to the Massachusetts ballot questions and encourage their newsroom to continue not just reporting, but offering informative resources to their host communities. As readers, we should make it clear to publications that we trust that we value their guidance. Our democracy relies on good journalism to illuminate what we can’t see, so we can vote for the best possible future for our families and communities.
GRAPHIC BY RACHEL WONG
FUN & GAMES
The Tufts Daily Crossword: 11/5/2024
ACROSS
1 Grp. suspended by the Intl. Olympic Committee in 2019
4 Ron of the LA Dodgers, known as "the Penguin"
7 Night before
10 Reactions to something cute
13 Red-headed lifesaver
15 Parisian train system
16 ET's EV
17 Reason Narcissus might have fallen into the lake?
19 Family man
20 Herb awarded the National Medal of Arts in 2013
21 Type of flour, or a Parents' Weekend staple at Tufts
23 What some dark breads are made of
24 Health resorts
26 "Egg and cheese ___ Kaiser roll, please!"
27 Where "Grey's Anatomy" drama happens
28 Some nasal sprays, for short
30 "_______ Coming", song on The Weeknd's 2016 album "Starboy"
34 Type of campaign
36 The 47th president of the United States
37 Little color
38 They treat big boo-boos, for short
39 Tomorrow's news, with 36A
40 Swanson of soccer
41 Release to the masses
42 Word part: Abbr.
44 Instagram short
46 Yale student
49 Outerwear with many pockets
53 Many 17th century rooms
55 They say it doesn't define you
56 Nebraska beef delicacies
58 Software used to create 3D models
59 2000 pounds
60 What soothes a sore throat
61 Poetic dedication
62 Hydrocarbon suffix
63 Sault ___ Marie, Michigan
64 Tree spirit
1 Modern expression of defeated confirmation
2 Trumpian adverb
3 Acronym for people at risk of poverty or social exclusion
4 British cracker brand
5 Tools used to predict voter turnout
6 Nonchalant assent
7 Spooky sounding lake
8 Popular payment app
9 Conforming to one's back
10 Their logo is one ring short of the Olympics
11 Sports radio station based in New York
12 Fries go-with 14 French summer
Late Night At The Daily
Claire: “Did you see that video of her feeding her fans pizza in Brazil?” Aisha: “Benjamin Franklin or Ellora?”
18 Aggressive attention-getter
22 Dormant
25 Operatic solo / Parched
29 Nicolas of “National Treasure”
30 Candy-related presidential nickname / Suffix with ox-
31 What McDonald of yore had / Bit of paperwork
32 Hyphen’s relative
33 It tends to lean Democrat
34 Antiquated amplification system
35 What color Wyoming will likely go in the 2024 election
37 Actress Ward, host of the science podcast "Ologies"
39 Terra firma
43 Iced tea garnish
45 Gas unit, across the pond
46 Make happy 47 Compare
48 Where ___
49 It can be hard-shelled or soft-shelled
50 "Zoinks!"
51 Give up
52 Of sound mind
54 Country with a cedar tree as its symbol: Abbr.
57 Oohs and ___
CROSSWORD
by Arielle Weinstein & Leo Sajkov
ARTS & POP CULTURE
How online influencers are shaping the 2024 election
techniques have transferred over to the political realm as well. On July 29, TikToker Bryce Hall endorsed former President Donald Trump on his account of over 28 million followers, saying, “If [Vice President] Kamala Harris becomes President, I’m definitely gonna off myself.” The video received around 2 million views.
Recently, however, Mikey Angelo, an Instagram influencer with 743,000 followers, posted a video saying “There are only 22 days more to vote, so, like, seriously, go vote.” The caption clearly denoted that Angelo was paid by a Democratic political action committee for the post. But here’s the thing: Legally, he did not have to disclose this.
The secret weapon of this year’s election is online influencers. This influence was perhaps most formally acknowledged at the Democratic National Convention in early August. The national party’s nominating convention welcomed five influencers to speak at the convention: Deja Foxx, Nabela Noor, Carlos Eduardo Espina, Olivia Julianna and John Russell. Combined, they have a total of more than 24 million social media followers. By inviting them, the party signaled a shift in how campaigns approach outreach; influencers have the most reach with the younger voters, bridging the gap between politics and the youth. In fact, a Pew Research Center study found that over half of Americans receive news from some form of social media, and nearly 40% of adults under 30 receive such news from TikTok. Emily Soong, a spokeswoman for the convention, seemed to have an answer for why this is the case. “Content creators are a vehicle to reach new audiences, not just through their content, but through their unique ability
to speak authentically to their communities,” Soong said. She is not wrong; influencers provide a level of authenticity that many mainstream news outlets don’t. But what does this mean for the future of TikTok and other social media platforms?
Most full-time social media influencers don’t generate most of their money through TikTok or Instagram. Rather, they accumulate most of their wealth through sponsorships, brand collaborations, or affiliate marketing, oftentimes attempting to inconspicuously incorporate sponsored content into their media output. However, no matter how cleverly an advertisement is disguised, influencers must still disclose them. The Federal Trade Commission, a consumer protection organization that works to protect consumers from fraudulent or unfair business practices of brands, requires that if you have a financial, employment, personal or family relationship with a brand, you must make it clear to your audience that the post was a paid sponsorship.
While consumers are perhaps most familiar with such marketing in the realm of beauty products, it appears that such
On the surface, this could simply seem like an influencer expressing his political views. However, many were suspicious of his motives after another prominent influencer, Tana Mongeau, said she “hypothetically was just offered a lot of money to endorse a political party” on her podcast. She continued, explaining that she was “told an alleged list of other influencers that have already hypothetically accepted money to do those hypothetical things that were hypothetically offered to me to hypothetically do.” Though we do not know if Hall was paid to endorse Trump or not, it raises an interesting question –– Are influencers being compensated to stand behind specific candidates? If so, to what extent is this happening?
Such methods of political campaigning are not unheard of. Prior to Biden dropping out of the race, Priorities USA, a super PAC supporting President Joe Biden’s reelection, spent $1 million paying influencers to post about the upcoming election. At the time, polling indicated that younger voters were increasingly critical of Biden because of his age or his stance toward Israel. Other PACs, such as NextGen America and American Bridge, also paid influencers during the 2022 midterm elections.
Because of how rapidly the influencer space is developing, particularly in politics, there are no general guidelines surrounding political sponsorships. The Federal Trade Commission’s rules regarding sponsorships only cover content related to “commerce.” Election advertisements are overseen by an entirely different agency –– the Federal Election Commission. The Federal Election Commission does have rigid rules regarding paid political communications over the phone, on TV or on mailers, but these don’t apply to influencers. In fact, regarding influencers and political sponsorships, there are no rules. Influencers do not have to tell us if their post endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris or Trump is genuine, or rooted in thousands of dollars.
Last year, the Federal Election Commission had the opportunity to extend its rules to influencers. A progressive nonprofit, the Brennan Center for Justice, argued that the Federal Election Commission should require that paid influencer posts include a disclaimer so that voters know it was a paid post. Ultimately, however, the Federal Election Commission decided against doing so, determining that campaign payments to influencers
did not fit within existing ad regulations. Two of the commissioners dissented, saying that “the public is entitled to know when those influencers are being paid to spread a political message.” After all, if influencers are required to disclose payments for reviewing a makeup product or an energy drink, should they not also be required to disclose payment for endorsing a political party?
Due to the lack of federal laws, some platforms have formed their own rules, but this can easily get convoluted. Meta has allowed paid political content as long as the sponsoring organization is registered in the ad library. TikTok, on the other hand, does not allow any political advertising, even going as far to remove a video that was labeled as part of Priorities USA. But, if influencers do not have to disclose paid political content, then how would TikTok even know if content was paid advertising?
The rising influence of social media in politics raises some questions about transparency, ethics and the nature of political discourse. As influencers continue to shape public opinion, the absence of clear regulations leaves room for manipulation and voter deceit. Moving forward, both the Federal Election Commission and social media platforms will need to consider if and how they regulate political sponsorships. Clearly influencers can be bought –– and as of now, there is a high chance that we would not even know.
‘The Apprentice’ is a look into the rotten underbelly of Trump’s story
Alexander Minagar Contributing Writer
Is there anything surprising left about former President Donald Trump? Ali Abassi, a filmmaker, would say yes. In his latest film, “The Apprentice,” Abassi rakes the muck that is the rotten underbelly of Trump’s formative New York years under the guidance of Roy Cohn, a malignant tumor of a lawyer who lays out three Machiavellian rules to a young and malleable Trump: “Attack, attack, attack,” “admit nothing, deny everything” and “no matter what happens, you claim victory and never admit defeat.”
The film centers on a not-oft dramatized period of Trump’s life. Fresh out of Wharton, University of Pennsylvania’s business school, Trump seeks to carve his name in the Big Apple and try to differentiate himself from a stolid father who established the family name. Whether dining amongst magnates and moguls, jockeying control of the derelict Commodore Hotel or beating back racial discrimination charges by the Department of Justice and the
NAACP, he (wrongly, in hindsight) assumes that he would have nothing to lose in courting the mentorship of New York City sleazebag number one, Roy Cohn.
From Roy Cohn’s first scene — across the bar, with a camera slowly zooming as he locks eyes with Trump — his personality underscores Trump’s moral deterioration. Cohn — played to perfection, idiosyncrasy after idiosyncrasy, by Jeremy Strong — is slippery and elusive, clever and acute, with a penchant for witty remarks, tanning beds, boisterous parties and blackmail. Cohn’s is a life defined by self-negation — perfectly framed to inculcate within Trump a willful incognizance of the value of truth and justice.
In an interview with The New York Times, Strong described the intentions of the film and said, “We’re trying to hold a mirror up to this world and these individuals and try to understand how we got here.” Understanding these intentions is easiest when looking at the roles Strong has taken in recent years. Starting with “Succession,” where he plays Kendall Roy, the grief-stricken black sheep of the
Roy family, a media dynasty whose source material draws from the Trumps, the Murdochs and the Redstones, who navigates corporate rot in modern America while constantly failing at the impossible task of filling his father’s shoes. In “Armageddon Time,” James Gray’s largely autobiographical film about Jewish identity in America, Strong plays a plumber in Queens who sends his son to a preparatory school in New York where the Trump family names looms in the background (Maryanne Trump visits the school to give speeches and Fred Trump helps fund the school). Strong came back to Broadway this past year with a revival of Henrik Ibsen’s “An Enemy of the People,” where he plays Thomas Stockman, a divisive doctor who parallels Strong’s own complete conviction of artistic pursuit. He goes against the politicians and warns his town that they must close their resort baths — even if it means economic loss for a growing city — because the water has been contaminated. And “The Apprentice” seems to complete the trail that Strong has been blazing.
The Trump we know today is a product of Cohn. Though his actions from the 1980s seem trivial compared to his wrongdoings in recent years, the pangs of a never-satiated hunger to game the system, which Cohn nurtured in a young Trump, remain tangible in the minds of contemporary viewers and voters alike. Trump in the film (played ambitiously by Sebastian Stan, who, in preparation, had a folder on his phone of “a hundred and thirty videos of Trump, which capture his tiniest gestures and his over-all mien”) is misogynistic, anti-exercise, pro-diet pill and a habitual liar, and stabs Cohn in the back in the end. At Cohn’s birthday he gifts the
lawyer, who is in a wheelchair and slowly withering from mysterious AIDS-like symptoms, a pair of fake Tiffany diamond cufflinks.
Nothing is more telling about this film than its turbulent struggle toward a release in America. Since its first screenings this year, competing for the Palme d’Or at Cannes, Trump and his legal team have threatened lawsuits against its distribution. Eventually though, the film secured a widespread theatrical run this past month. In an election cycle burdened by the gravity of a second Trump term, one can only hope “The Apprentice” might provide Trump a moment of genuine self-reflection.
VIA FLICKR
The 2024 Democratic National Convention is pictured on Aug. 22.
Annika Pillai Arts Editor
VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS Fred and Donald Trump are pictured at Wollman Rink in Central Park in 1986.
‘Oh, Mary!’ is a political farce for the ages
Nate Hall Associate Editor
Theater has always been political. Some of the biggest Broadway hits of the last few decades have explored political issues, like “Rent,” “Come From Away” and “Hadestown.” Others have taken on the American political system itself, including “Hamilton,” which focuses on the Founding Fathers, and “Suffs,” a new musical about the women’s suffrage movement. But Broadway’s latest political story comes from one of the most unexpected sources — a play so campy and absurd that for just 90 minutes, you’ll forget about the political chaos we’re living in and find some joy in the chaos onstage.
The play in question is Cole Escola’s “Oh, Mary!,” a madcap comedy about the life of Mary Todd Lincoln, Abraham Lincoln’s beleaguered wife, in the days leading up to her husband’s assassination in 1865. This version of Mary Todd, played masterfully by Escola, is an alcoholic diva, prone to rages, who longs to return to her past life as a cabaret star. Escola, who started their career as a cabaret performer in New York, is a force of nature, channeling their years of experience onstage into their first Broadway production. Originally scheduled for a six-week off-Broadway run that started in February, Escola’s play quickly became a crowd favorite, transferring to the Broadway stage this summer.
“Oh, Mary” is a decidedly ahistorical play, as if a U.S. history textbook was sent through a paper shredder and then carefully reconstructed by Carol Burnett, Pee-wee Herman and the stars of “RuPaul’s Drag Race.” Mary, decked out in curls and a massive hoop skirt, has no interest in her husband’s work and doesn’t even seem to grasp that there’s a war going on — when Abraham, played by the wonderfully expressive Conrad Ricamora, reminds her the country is at war with South, she replies, “the south of what?!” Mary wants nothing more than to return to the stage, but her husband refuses to take her seriously. He looks for ways to distract her from her cabaret dreams — first, with Louise, played by Bianca Leigh, a chaperone meant to keep Mary’s chaos in check. This doesn’t work, as Mary nearly bullies her chaperone to tears and reminds her husband that she once threw Louise down a flight of stairs.
When Louise’s interventions fail, Abe arranges for Mary to take acting lessons, but she finds a way to sabotage this plan as well, as she falls in love with her handsome acting teacher, played by James Scully, and struggles her way through monologues from “The Tempest” with a comically bad Scottish accent. Lincoln has plenty of his own issues, too, as we learn that he is hiding his true sexuality and is distracted by a young assistant, played by Tony Macht, who he often calls into the Oval Office
for private ‘meetings.’ Ricamora plays Lincoln like you’ve never seen him before — still stately and devoted to his work, but with several added layers of rage, lust and inner turmoil that come to surface in some of the play’s most hilarious moments.
With “Oh, Mary!,” writer-star Escola has gifted Broadway with one of its funniest shows of the last decade — audiences will be hard-pressed to find another show with more laughs per minute. Escola’s version of Mary is both completely absurd and incredibly endearing — nowhere else will you see a First Lady who drinks paint thinner, actively ignores her own children and tells jokes about ice cream so risqué that I can’t publish them in this review. Escola is also a master of physicality, wildly gesticulating and prancing around in their comically large skirt. After standing on her husband’s desk to deliver a monologue during an acting lesson, Mary struggles to dismount the desk, and Escola turns what should be a perfectly normal moment into comedy gold. On top of all the slapstick and raunchy humor, there are some genuinely surprising narrative twists in the play’s final scenes that are best left unspoiled.
Masterfully directed by Sam Pinkleton, “Oh, Mary!” moves like a well oiled machine. Pinkleton gives the five-person cast the freedom to make the most of the com-
ically large Oval Office set, created by the scenic design collective “dots.” Pinkleton’s background in dance is apparent — the one act play is a parade of perfectly choreographed chaos that never lets up for a minute. Every design element is wonderfully campy, from the disco-pop show tunes that play before the show begins to the well placed spotlights that display the cast’s reactions to Mary’s antics. The actors’ overdramatic facial expressions are matched perfectly by the play’s style, with piano transitions between scenes that evoke the style of an old Charlie Chaplin film.
While it’s no secret that all theater is political, “Oh, Mary!” reminds us that all politics is theatrical too. When a politician gives a speech, they are delivering a carefully rehearsed perfor-
mance in an attempt to win over their audience. But Escola’s play has absolutely no interest in delivering a serious political message. Instead, “Oh, Mary!” demonstrates the incredible power of theater to simply make us laugh and escape from our problems for a while. In the play, Abraham criticizes Mary for her love of cabaret and suggests that she focus on “legitimate” theater instead. Escola has surely dealt with similar criticisms in their own career, and this play is their response to those critics. A college dropout with no professional theater training, Escola is not your typical playwright, and “Oh, Mary!” is not your typical play — that’s exactly what makes it so special.
“Oh, Mary!” is playing now through Jan. 19 at the Lyceum Theatre in New York.
The MFA’s ‘Power of the People’ exhibition explores the history of democracy through art
Shannon Murphy Arts Editor
Amid the chaos of the 2024 presidential election, the Museum of Fine Arts Boston presents “Power of the People: Art and Democracy.” The exhibition showcases diverse perspectives on democracy as explored through works of art and highlights the promise, the practice and the presentation of democracy from ancient Greece to the present day. The Daily had the opportunity to speak with Phoebe Segal, Mary Bryce Comstock senior curator of
Greek and Roman art, about the curation of this exhibit and the role of visual art in politics.
Editor’s Note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Tufts Daily (TD): What was the inspiration for this exhibit? What did the curation process look like?
Phoebe Segal (PS): We opened new galleries of Greek and Roman art at the end of 2021. And when we were preparing for that project, we were thinking a lot about connections between ancient civilizations and our time. One of the subjects that kept coming up was our political system. It was some-
thing that was kind of gnawing at me, and this was a way to really explore how ideas about democracy have been embedded in visual art since the first democracy that we know about, which is ancient Athens founded at the end of the sixth century B.C.
TD: Historically, how was art used to promote democracy or demonstrate resilience?
PS: One of the things that I looked at were the stories that we tell about how democracy has come to be. We see this all the time with public sculpture in our country, about the stories that are told in public monuments and how they often gloss over or just completely upend what happened in service of the narratives that powers that be want to tell. A lot of the show is about these ideal visions of democracy and also how artists have pushed back on those and complicated those stories through their work.
TD: Sometimes there is a fine line between expressing ideas of a political system and influencing how people feel about a political entity. What do you think is the difference between those two?
PS: It’s dependent on who the patron of the work is and who the audience is. This show is first and foremost a platform for what I call “visual arguments” about and in relation to democracy because they’re putting forth their ideas. Some of those ideas are respond-
ing to a particular patron, like a state that wants to create a monument, or a private patron creating a portrait of a citizen. There’s also work where the artist is expressing their own personal view, like their own take on something. And then there’s also examples — and we have several examples of this in the show — where artists are coming together in collectives to raise awareness about particular social issues that are important to them. So it really is dependent on who’s making it and for whom and why.
TD: Are there any local artists from the Boston area in this exhibit?
PS: There are a lot of Boston area artists in the show. Of the 180 works of art, all but 10 of them are from the MFA’s collection. Because we are the major encyclopedic museum of Boston, and because Boston was one of the homes of the American Revolution and a center for the abolitionist movement, the collection supports those topics very well. One of the main artists represented in the show is Tomashi Jackson, who has a mid-career survey at the Tufts University art gallery right now. Her painting, which is called “Contradiction” is actually in the introduction to the show because it is one of the most important pieces.
TD: What do you think is the role of art museums and exhibitions such as this in the sphere
of politics, especially during an election year?
PS : The museum is a place of civic learning, and many of us are visual learners. I think that the show and the museum, even when the show has disbanded, really provide an opportunity for people to build their civic awareness through deep engagement with objects. They have so much to tell us, and can not only inspire our imaginations but prompt us to ask: “How can we do better? What is our role?”
TD: What do you hope visitors will take from this exhibit?
PS: I just hope that it makes them think and talk to their friends and families and makes them think about their responsibilities. I think looking at history helps us feel less alone, and that can help us feel hopeful for the future. I worked with the MFA teens program, and they selected objects and wrote labels for the show. We also had a roundtable with MFA pathways interns, who are college students, and some graduate student interns. So we had a lot of input from [teens and young adults], and I really hope that people from Tufts will come see the show and see themselves reflected in it.
“Power of the People: Art and Democracy” is open at the Museum of Fine Arts Boston through Feb. 16.
COURTESY EMILIO MADRID
Conrad Ricamora and Cole Escola are pictured in “Oh, Mary!” at the Lyceum Theatre in New York.
VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
Jean-Jacques-François Le Barbier’s “The Magnanimity of Lycurgus,” is pictured.
Abraham Lincoln’s illustrious wrestling career
Former President Abraham Lincoln is perhaps the greatest presidential athlete in American history. Even though former President Dwight Eisenhower was inducted into the World Golf Hall of Fame and former President Gerald Ford won two national championships with the Michigan Wolverines football team, Lincoln has a better track record than both of them. Over the course of his 12-year wrestling career, he dominated against his compatriots, reportedly amassing more than 300 victories and losing only once. Unlike former President Donald Trump, who is a WWE Hall of Famer, Lincoln was inducted into the National Wrestling Hall of Fame in 1992, where he is recognized among the greatest wrestlers in history.
In contrast to modern wrestlers, Lincoln was primarily a catch wrestler, a style of wrestling that has very few rules. Catch wrestling is defined by its quick matches and takedowns, and rose to prominence among
English workers who spent their free time engaging in catchstyle fights. It also has roots in Brazil, where Luta Livre, or “freestyle fighting,” was popular. Both catch and Luta Livre techniques became incredibly prevalent in Mixed Martial Arts, despite the fact that the style of wrestling has been in decline. Because catch wrestling is con-
sidered to be the foundation of folkstyle and freestyle fighting, it makes sense why a farm boy like Lincoln would excel in that kind of backyard brawl.
Lincoln’s infamous size is what made him the Hall of Fame wrestler that he was. He stood at 6 feet, 4 inches and at the time, there were few men whose height came close. Thus, Lincoln
could outreach almost anyone. He likely used his height in combination with his background in farming to generate devastating takedowns and submissions. Of course, with all of his size, pinning an opponent wasn’t off the table either. Honest Abe putting a poor coal miner in a headlock could have very well been a reality — after all, he wrestled
hundreds of people. Since there wasn’t a large competitive circuit, Lincoln had little desire to train to fight. He fought largely for the love of the sport.
Lincoln’s most prized match was against Jack Amstrong. Armstrong was a clerk when his boss challenged any of the local Clary’s Grove Boys to a wrestling match against Lincoln. The soon-to-be Hall of Famer marched his way to Armstrong, where a challenge was issued. Lincoln dominated the match, and Armstrong admitted his defeat. Strangely, a sense of respect sprouted between the two men.
There is one blemish in the 16th president’s wrestling career. His only confirmed loss is to Pvt. Lorenzo Dow Thompson. Although Lincoln was in the prime of his wrestling career at the time, he simply could not outmuscle the better wrestler. Lincoln was promptly thrown out of the ring where suffered his first and only defeat. After the loss, Lincoln went on to win many more matches. His wrestling fame was likely a major factor in winning the highest office in the United States.
Start progress towards your M.S.
ONLINE or ON CAMPUS
Max Sharf Staff Writer
VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
A drawing of a young Lincoln in a fight, originally published in 1904, is pictured.
Truman holds two distinctions in presidential first pitch history — the first to throw a pitch left-handed and the first to throw a pitch with both hands. His ambidextrous nature rendered fans unsure of which arm he would use. Though his mechanics were not pretty, his creativity and audacity land him in the top five.
Bush Sr. was the first president to pitch from the rubber, not in front of the mound. Bush, the captain of Yale University’s baseball team, had a lifelong affection for the sport. This effort was not his finest, as he bounced it on the third base side of home plate. Still, it was a historic day, the first game at the new Oriole Park at Camden Yards, and I admire his courage in tossing from 60 feet, 6 inches.
Though no video exists of Taft’s effort, he ranks highly as the initiator of the tradition. A baseball player in his youth, Taft tossed the ball from his box before the Senators’ 1910 season opener against the Philadelphia Athletics. His passion for the game was admirable, and he’s the reason so many commanders in chief have flocked to the diamond.
FROM THE OVAL TO THE DIAMOND
Max Druckman Deputy Sports Editor
A lot has changed since 1910. There have been two world wars and six moon landings. Wawa has expanded into the Midwest. However, some constants have remained, including within the executive branch. Since former President William Howard Taft in 1910, every president has thrown out a first pitch at an MLB game, though former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden did so before taking office. Nonetheless, this merging of two American institutions deserves a closer look as America selects its next leader. Thus, I present the definitive top 10 American presidents’ first pitches.
Roosevelt’s presence is due to his extensive first pitch resume. He delivered a record 11 first pitches over 12 years, and his form was simply a wrist flick. I chose the 1937 Midsummer Classic because Roosevelt, who battled polio his entire life, was videoed walking to his box to deliver the pitch, a rare instance of him captured walking on tape.
Trump vs. Biden: A tale of the tape
Maxwell Shoustal and Henry Blickenstaff
Managing Editor and Executive Sports Editor
Undoubtedly, the largest question on voters’ minds as they head to the booths this November is who would win in a golf match between Republican candidate former President Donald Trump or President Joe Biden. Conversation around the topic rose to such a fervor that it was argued during the June 27 debate between the two candidates at the time. Trump claimed that he “just won two club championships — not even senior, two regular club championships,” and boasted that he could easily beat Biden in a match. Biden retorted that he would be “happy to play golf” with the former president on the condition that Trump was willing to carry his own bag. Alas, presidential elections are not chosen via golf; most voters are likely unconcerned with who the superior player is, and Biden is no longer the Democratic nominee following the disastrous debate. However, we will nonetheless analyze who would win in a hypo-
The youngest elected president was also one of the most athletic. It’s unsurprising that his pitching motion was top-notch and that he easily generated velocity at the inaugural game of the new Washington Senators franchise. Regarding his pitch, White Sox manager Al Lopez remarked, “He can really fire that thing.”
Wilson, a baseball fanatic, held season passes to New York Giants games. In 1915, he became the first president to attend the World Series and threw out the first ball before Game 2. Known for his fastball velocity, he threw “smoke.” The history and skill behind his pitches yield a high mark.
Known more for his basketball skills, Obama’s first pitch earns its entry due to its aesthet ics. His Chicago White Sox jacket, jeans and sneakers, coupled with the sparkling St. Louis crowd, made his effort very “presidential.” However, the windup and the pitch were under whelming, as Obama bounced it in front of the plate.
thetical match between the two in order to hopefully lighten the mood of a very serious election.
Few U.S. presidents have been more golf-obsessed than Donald Trump. He owns a remarkable 18 golf courses around the world, including the very highly ranked Trump Turnberry in Scotland and Trump National Bedminster in New Jersey. Jack Nicklaus, one of the greatest golfers of all time, once claimed that Trump “loves the game of golf more than he loves money.” Whether Trump is actually as good as he claims is questionable — his alleged 2.5 handicap would place him among the best amateur golfers in the world — but he can certainly play, even if he
is 78. In a viral video this summer, Trump was a guest on twotime U.S. Open champion Bryson DeChambeau’s YouTube channel. The two attempted to break 50 from the front tees in a scramble format — meaning they both hit shots and played from the better of the two balls. The video has nearly 13 million views and is by far the most watched video on DeChambeau’s channel.
Trump’s swing is no work of art, but it’s extremely effective. His club path is shallow and his hands stay low, never getting higher than his chest. He doesn’t take the club back very far, but he torques quickly and rotates fully through the ball. It’s a short
Clinton’s first pitch opened Cleveland’s Jacobs Field in 1994. His motion, delivery and pitch were spectacular, as he tossed a smooth left-handed strike. What’s more, his pitch bested Hall of Fame pitcher Bob Feller’s, who delivered his pitch immediately after Clinton. A commendable effort
and fast motion that generates a surprising amount of force. While his age limits his power, Trump hits it far for a 78-year-old, and his swing produces a dependable left-to-right ball flight that rarely missed the fairway in the video with DeChambeau.
It’s also clear that Trump doesn’t lack any confidence. After hitting his tee shot on the par 3 second hole inside of ten feet, he asked DeChambeau, “You think Biden can do that?”
Biden’s athletic abilities are often called into question, especially after videos of him falling down the stairs and falling off of a bike have gone viral. Indeed, Biden is currently 81 years old, which explains why his physical abilities leave something to be desired. In his prime, Biden was a talented high school football player and may have been a very good athlete. On the U.S. Golf Association’s website, Biden’s handicap is listed as a 6.7, although the newest rounds he has listed are from 2018. During the debate, he claimed his handicap was an eight.
Taking either of these ostensible handicaps at face value would mean Biden is quite the skilled golf-
er, as any handicap lower than 10 is difficult to achieve. Biden’s golf coach backed up the president’s claims that he would beat Trump in a match and implied that Trump would likely cheat in a hypothetical match between the two.
Whether Biden actually lives up to the handicap is hard to verify, as there is little footage of him actually playing golf. In footage that does exist, Biden’s swing actually looks fairly good. His backswing is not particularly long, and he doesn’t appear to be generating a lot of ball speed. Still, his downswing and follow through look solid and repeatable, especially for a senior player. He’s clearly an experienced player, and his advanced age would likely be the only factor holding him back on the course.
If the two hit the links today to settle this, Trump would likely come out on top. But if both are telling the truth about their lowest handicaps, peak Biden might stand a chance against peak Trump. Either way, a match between these two would be must-see TV but probably more for its comedic value than for the athletic prowess of the two.
GRAPHIC BY RACHEL LIU
10. Bill Clinton
9. Barack Obama
8. Franklin Delano Roosevelt
7. George H.W. Bush
6. Woodrow Wilson
4. John F. Kennedy
3. William Howard Taft
1. George W. Bush
5. Harry S. Truman
2. Gerald Ford