The Fourcast Magazine | The Elections Issue | Feb-March 2016

f Everything You Need to Know About the 2016 Primaries The Fourcast Magazine | The Hockaday School February/March 2016

The Fourcast

The Hockaday School 11600 Welch Rd. Dallas, Texas 75229 214.363.6311 hockadayfourcast.org

Special Issue | The Election Volume 1, Issue 1 February/March 2016

f

the elections issue

6

The Candidates Get the rundown on all the candidates vying for president in 2016, from the real estate moguls to the neurosurgeons to the lifelong politicians. Learn about their political - or not so political - backgrounds, their stances on key issues and the successes or failures of their campaigns.

10

The Issues Get informed on the major issues that have been discussed during this campaign season such as same-sex marriage, ISIS and immigration.

Understand the background information on the issues and what the candidates think should be done in these various areas.

14

The Votes Learn about registering to vote, Super Tuesday and the purpose of the Electoral College. This section examines the electoral process and how candidates transition from announcing their campaign to winning the November election.

16

The Opinions Read what staff writers and student leaders at Hockaday from Young Democrats, Young Republicans and Young Independents think about the candidates and this year’s election.

On the cover “Political Duel” Illustration by Wendy Ho

Be Informed.

Learn the Facts.

Get Prepared.

The Fourcast brings you this special elections edition filled with information about the candidates, the issues and the opinions of the 2016 presidential election.

All content up-to-date as of Feb. 22, 2016.

The Fourcast Magazine Volume 1, Issue 1 February/March 2016

Magazine Editor: Mary Orsak Staff Writers: Austria Arnold, Amelia Brown, Emily Fuller, Shreya Gunukula, Aurelia Han, Cheryl Hao, Maria Harrison, Amanda Kim, Heidi Kim, Inaara Padani, Erin Thomas, Sonya Xu Contributing Writers: Virginia Beshears, Gabria Pearson, Aleena Tariq Staff Artist: Wendy Ho. Faculty Adviser: Ana Rosenthal Editorial Policy: The Fourcast Magazine is written primarily for students of the Hockaday Upper School, its faculty and staff. The Fourcast Magazine has a press run of 600 and is printed by Greater Dallas Press. It is distributed free of charge to the Hockaday community.

Businesses who wish to advertise in The Fourcast Magazine should contact Sunila Steephen, Business Manager, at ssteephen@ hockaday.org. We reserve the right to refuse any advertising which is deemed inappropriate to the Hockaday community. Opinions are clearly marked and are the expressed opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect that of The Fourcast staff, its adviser or any member of the Hockaday community. Any questions or concerns about should be addressed to Erin Thomas, Editor-in-Chief, at ethomas@hockaday.org.

5

Candidates by the Numbers “I will build a great wall – and nobody builds walls better than me.”

0.3%

The margin in which Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders in the Iowa Caucuses

DONALD TRUMP on his plan to protect the border if he becomes president.

340

The number of days since the first candidate, Ted Cruz, announced his presidential bid.

“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed.”

BEN CARSON on the Second Amendment, guns and Nazi Germany.

“You may have seen I recently launched a Snapchat account.

I love it. I love it. Those messages disappear all by themselves.”

HILLARY CLINTON on her recently acquired Snapchat, in reference to the Benghazi email scandal.

16

The number of candidates, both Republicans and Democrats, who have dropped out of the race.

77 of 263

The number of roll call votes Marco Rubio missed in Senate while campaigning last year.

the candidates Campaign Buttons

Stories by Sonya Xu, Emily Fuller, Amelia Brown, Austria Arnold, Inaara Padani, Aurelia Han, Erin Thomas, Amanda Kim and Shreya Gunukula.

Buttons by Mary Orsak.

Images provided by Gage Skidmore, Rubenstein and Michael Vadon.

HILLARY CLINTON (D)

BERNIE SANDERS (D)

A teenage Hillary Clinton, dressed in a cowgirl outfit and straw cowboy hat, was a Goldwater girl. In ninth grade, Hillary Clinton read Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater’s 1960 book titled “Conscience of a Conservative,” which inspired her to write an essay on the American conservative movement. She even volunteered to check voter registration lists against people’s addresses, searching for voter fraud. However, after hearing a speech from Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Clinton was inspired to work in public service and became a Democrat in 1968.

Clinton attended Wellesley College and later went to Yale Law School, where she met her future husband, Bill Clinton, who served as the 42nd U.S. President from 1993 to 2000. As First Lady, she was chair of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform.

Clinton advocated for the immunization of children, public awareness of health issues and more widespread health insurance coverage. In 2001, she became the first American First Lady to win public office, serving as the first female senator from New York. In 2008, Clinton unsuccessfully ran against Barack Obama for the presidency, and after her defeat, she rallied behind President Obama. In 2009, Clinton resigned as senator when she accepted the position of U.S. Secretary of State during President Obama’s first term.

During her time as Secretary of State, Clinton faced scrutiny regarding the use of her personal email account rather than her government one as well as the classified content sent on her personal server. The FBI continues to investigate these emails. The State Department says that Clinton had sent at least 22 emails with “Top Secret” information and 1,600 messages with information classified at lower levels.

Furthermore, she has been criticized for her ties to Wall Street, all the while wanting to stand up to big banks. For example, Goldman Sachs paid her $675,000 for three speeches.

In less than seven months, she amassed $2 million from events like these.

In terms of issues, Clinton favors the Affordable Care Act and wants to extend healthcare to all Americans. A goal for her economic agenda is to raise incomes for the middle class and raise taxes on the rich. On the subject of education, she wants to make college more affordable overall and hopes to refinance existing student loans. Additionally, climate change is an urgent matter for Clinton. In terms of immigration, she stands for providing a path of full citizenship for illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. She is pro-choice on the matter of abortion and supports the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage.

Growing up in a three-room, rent controlled apartment in Brooklyn, young Bernie Sanders and his Polish immigrant father lived in poverty for years. After using his upbringing as motivation to educate himself and help others in similar situations, Sanders has, 60 years later, found himself as a Democratic presidential candidate.

Running his campaign off the anger of the impoverished American people, this current senator from Vermont has fought for civil change since 1962 during his years at the University of Chicago.

Before winning his seat on the senate in 2008, Sanders served as the mayor of Vermont’s largest town, Burlington, for eight years, in which the city made major progress in the creation of affordable housing, progressive taxation, environmental protection, child care, women’s rights, youth programs and the arts.

From his days leading the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee in college, to leading the city of Burlington, to sitting in the House of Representatives, Sanders has finally gained political momentum.

Early in his campaign, he stood in the shadow of the famous front-runner, Hillary Clinton. The press considered him “unelectable” and an “old grumpy grandpa” according to many; however, Sanders has gradually gained votes across the states. By appealing to the young, frustrated population of America, Sanders received 80 percent of the votes from voters under the age of 30 in the Iowa Caucus.

Although he is the oldest candidate to ever run for president, Sanders, 74, acts as the ‘Hope and Change’ candidate for 2016. Because he realized the lack of finances have on families at an early age, Sanders seeks relief for the millions of Americans living under the poverty line.

This democratic-socialist focuses on economic reform across the country by raising the minimum wage, breaking up huge financial institutions, making college tuition free and fighting for pay equity. Sanders also plans to invest one trillion dollars in public work renovation in order to create jobs.

Because Socialism has failed in the past, many that have lived to see it crumble in other countries are terrified of the idea.

Sanders also reflects these ideals in his own life, earning $175 thousand a year, compared to the some of the other candidates making millions.

As Sanders fights for Wall Street reform, his campaign also emphasizes national energy policy, civil rights, national healthcare, the environment and workers’ rights.

7

TED CRUZ (R)

MARCO RUBIO (R)

DONALD TRUMP (R)

Despite only receiving 631,812 votes in the primary election for a position that represents 26.97 million people, Ted Cruz was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2012. As senator, Cruz attempted to convince fellow Republicans in his 21-hour speech on the senate floor to join him in instrumenting a government shutdown if Obamacare isn’t defunded.

During the speech, Cruz vowed to speak until he could no longer stand, and he eventually resorted to reading Dr. Seuss’s “Green Eggs and Ham” live from the nation’s capital as a bedtime story for his daughter. This act displays Cruz’s unyielding determination to defend his beliefs and dedication to protecting what he views as right and wrong — even if it means shutting down the U.S. government.

Texas Sen. Cruz was the first candidate to announce his campaign in the 2016 presidential election. His campaign is centered on his conservative beliefs regarding immigration, family life, foreign policy and economy.

Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada. His mother Eleanor was born in Delaware, so Cruz became an American citizen at birth. However, many debate whether Cruz is eligible to run because of the constitutional requirement for the president to be a natural-born American citizen.

In 2015, when Cruz officially announced his candidacy, he renounced his dual citizenship to prevent it from further jeopardizing the campaign.

His father, Cuban immigrant Rafael Cruz, came to the United States with a student visa. Referring to his father as a prime example of legal immigration, Cruz strives to strengthen immigration laws and border control to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the U.S. After receiving his law degree, Cruz began to practice law in Texas and went on to hold many positions, including associate deputy attorney general at the U.S. Department of Justice, solicitor general for Texas and domestic policy advisor on the 2000 BushCheney campaign.

Cruz’s ultra-conservatism distinguished the young politician, leading to his considerable win in the Iowa Caucus.

One of these ultraconservative ideas that he believes will give the U.S. an economic boost is the “Cruz Simple Flat Tax.” He projects that a 10 percent income tax will raise wages by 12.2 percent and create millions of additional jobs.

Cruz also shares his conservative beliefs regarding marriage and family life. He takes a firm stance supporting pro-life and no samesex marriages.

Marco Rubio, a Florida native, is the 44-year-old son of Cuban immigrants. Rubio credits his uncle with instigating his passion for public service and politics by reading newspapers and books to him as a young boy.

A talented football player, Rubio went on to play for a year at Tarkio College in Tarkio, Mo. before transferring universities. He received an undergraduate degree from the University of Florida and a law degree from the University of Miami. Rubio was elected to the West Miami City Commission in 1998, and this was soon followed by his election into the Florida House of Representatives. In 2010, Rubio, a Republican, was elected into the U.S. Senate.

While in the Florida House of Representatives, Rubio worked his way up the ladder quickly. He became the majority leader in 2003, only four years after his election into the House. He then served as Speaker of the House in Florida from 2006 to 2008. He has been instrumental in change within the state of Florida. After hosting a number of events at which the public could share ideas, Rubio proposed his “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future.” Of these 100 ideas, over 50 were written into law.

Rubio was not expected to win the Senate seat in 2010. However, voters were impressed by his pledge to limit federal spending. He also gained support from the Tea Party during this campaign.

In 2012, there was speculation that Rubio might be nominated as Mitt Romney’s vice president. While Rubio denied the possibility, the Republican Party expressed interest in him because of both his pull in the important state of Florida as well as in the Latino community.

Rubio did not join Romney in his efforts and instead focused on immigration reform and pro-life legislation in the Senate.

Entering the Republican nomination race for the presidency in April 2015, Rubio’s campaign is based on the concept of a new Republican party and reflects his moderate-conservative views. Rubio came in third during the Iowa Caucus, barely trailing Donald Trump.

Rubio is pro-life and supports gun owners. He is also opposed to the Iran nuclear deal and claims that if elected, he will reverse it quickly. Rubio plans to raise the Child Tax Credit to help parents as they raise children.

To save taxpayer dollars, Rubio plans to raise the retirement age to receive Social Security considering that life expectancies have risen greatly.

Additionally, Rubio plans to loosen government holds on the economy to promote innovation.

Rubio strives to revitalize the American Dream and to create a “New American Century.”

Before his venture into politics, Donald Trump, former host of the reality TV show “The Apprentice,” would sit in his large, leather brown chair, where he coined his catchphrase, “you’re fired!” Television star, business leader and real estate developer are a few of his claims to fame. But what has truly put Trump in the spotlight is his decision to run for president as a Republican, despite the fact that he has no political experience whatsoever.

From the day he decided to run for president on June 16, 2015, Trump has faced criticism for his remarks that have been described by many as sexist and discriminatory. This behavior, however, is nothing new. When he was 13, his parents decided to send him to the New York Military Academy in hopes of correcting his rowdy and rebellious behavior.

After graduating in 1968 with a degree in economics from the Wharton School of Finance at the University of Pennsylvania, Trump was given control of his father’s company, Elizabeth Trump & Son, which he later renamed The Trump Organization.

Unlike his previous attempts at running for president in 1999 and 2012, it seems like Trump actually has a shot this time: since the first Republican debate on Aug. 6, 2015, Trump has been the front-runner of the GOP. Economically, Trump is a fiscal conservative and an advocate of cutting taxes to increase investment and consumer spending.

On the issue of the healthcare, Trump has no problem with expressing his absolute hatred of Obamacare and anything else Obama-related. Despite his previous belief that women should have the right to choose when it comes to abortion, Trump changed his mind and is now pro-life. Additionally, he believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Trump has a comprehensive plan when it comes to immigration, which involves building a wall at the Mexican border, deporting all undocumented individuals, ending birthright citizenship and temporarily banning all Muslims from entering the United States.

Trump has consistently performed well at each caucus, receiving second place in Iowa and first place in both New Hampshire and South Carolina.

However, his success has been abhorred by members of the GOP establishment such as Republican candidate Jeb Bush, who described Trump as “unhinged,” and Republican candidate Marco Rubio, who tweeted that Trump’s “habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together.”

V

They’re bringing drugs.

They’re bringing crime.

They’re rapists.

Donald Trump on immigrants from Mexico

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (I)

JEB BUSH (R)

Michael Bloomberg, former New York City mayor, is rumored to join the election as a third party candidate. The New York Times reported that if Bloomberg chooses to run, he would give $1 billion out of his own pocket for the presidential bid. Founder of Bloomberg L.P., a global financial data and media company, Bloomberg is the seventh richest man in the U.S. and has been in the talks for presidency in both 2008 and 2012. Opting out of these elections, he continued to serve as the New York City mayor for a total of three terms, from 2002 to 2014. Originally a Democrat, Bloomberg switched to the Republican Party while running for mayor, and in 2007, he became an Independent. In terms of his policies, Bloomberg has pushed for stricter gun control laws and has a zero-tolerance policy for handguns on the street. He also states that women in America should have the “fundamental right” to make reproductive decisions and has donated millions to women’s health organizations. Many New Yorkers have praised Bloomberg for making the city safer, cleaner and more successful, but others have criticized his “dictatorial style,” possibly referring to Bloomberg’s ban on smoking in public areas or control on soft drink sizes.

John Ellis “Jeb” Bush, the son of President George H. W. Bush and brother of President George W. Bush, served as the governor of Florida from 1999 to 2007. In June of 2016, Bush announced his campaign for the Republican nomination for the U.S. presidency. Bush’s views are often considered on the moderate side. On immigration, Bush plans to secure the border by establishing more advanced surveillance technology and enforcing a mandatory E-Verify system. He wants to push for the legal status of immigrants. Bush plans to do so by adding more intensive background checks, making immigrants pay fines and taxes, learn English, work and not receive federal assistance. While Bush promotes the right to own firearms, he does believe that a federal law should exist to establish more indepth background checks. On tax reform, Bush believes in establishing a “global economy,” in which he will increase the shrinking middle class. Recent polls show that Bush’s chance for the Republican nomination looks slim with poor performances in the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary. Former President George W. Bush made an appearance in South Carolina on Feb. 15 to support him in the South Carolina primaries on Feb. 20. However, Bush still did not perform well, prompting him to leave the race that evening.

HEAD TO HEAD MATCH-UPS Who would you prefer to vote for in the general election?

18% Trump

Clinton 82%

24% Cruz

Clinton 76%

36% Rubio

Clinton 64%

17% Trump

Sanders 83%

23% Cruz

Sanders 77%

33% Rubio

Sanders 67%

9

V

BEN CARSON (R)

JOHN KASICH (R)

There are, essentially, two Dr. Ben Carsons. The first — the real, verifiable Dr. Ben Carson — grew up in a middle-class neighborhood in Detroit and eventually rose to become the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Maryland until his retirement in 2013. An impressive career, by any standards — but apparently, not good enough for Carson. This brings us to the other Dr. Ben Carson, whose ever-changing life stories become more dramatic with each retelling. The real Carson has recently come under fire for his uncorroborated tales about knife fights in Detroit ghettos and full scholarships to West Point. With no previous political experience and an 11 percent support rating in the most recent national poll, Carson seems like a long shot for the Republican nomination; however, he remains a respected voice among conservatives. He is a pro-life supporter and emphasizes increased border security. He is also against the legalization of same-sex marriage, increased gun control and Obamacare, and he believes that the minimum wage should not be raised. He has further stated that the climate change debate is “irrelevant.”

Before announcing his 2016 presidential bid, Ohio Governor John Kasich had garnered plenty of political experience. Kasich began as an Ohio State Senator in 1978 and after 5 years moved on to be a congressman--from 1983 to 2001. In 1999, Kasich formed an exploratory committee to run for President, but after very poor fundraising, decided to abandon his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2000. He chose not to run for reelection to the House of Representatives and worked in the private sector for Fox News until 2010, when he was elected as the Governor of Ohio. On Jul. 21, 2015, Kasich entered the presidential race as the 16th GOP candidate. The recent results from the Iowa caucus showed Kasich as eighth out of the then 12 candidates. Although his numbers were not promising, Kasich allocated most of his resources to New Hampshire and hosted over 100 town hall meetings. His devotion resulted in a second place finish out of the Republican party. Known for his conservative yet modern views, Kasich openly supports gay marriage despite his personal opposition to the issue. Additionally, he believes in “reasonable exceptions” when it comes to abortion although he is mainly pro-life. Some other views include citizenship for illegal immigrants and using a balanced budget plan to lower the cost of a college education.

I am a proud lifelong fighter for women’s issues, because I firmly believe what’s good for women is good for America.

Hillary Clinton

Who would you prefer to vote for in the primaries?

40% Clinton

Sanders 60% Democrats

78% Cruz

Trump 22%

17% Cruz

Rubio 83%

11% Trump

Rubio 89% Republicans

Results from a Hockaday student poll conducted by The Fourcast’s Amanda Kim. The survey had 161 responses.

COLLEGE TUITION

W

the issues Hot Button Topics

The Fourcast presents the candidates’ stances on some of the most controversial and significant issues of the 2016 presidential election.

Stories by Heidi Kim, Maria Harrison, Aurelia Han, Mary Orsak, Inaara Padani and Erin Thomas.

ith dismal wage growth and a huge boost in college enrollment, the issue of college tuition has never been more relevant. The topic of student debt is almost universal in the United States. As a result, the idea of “free education” is very appealing to many people; however, the question is whether or not this is realistic. Each candidate has adopted a unique opinion as to how to deal with the education and student loan crisis in a way that will best benefit the country, varying from almost no consideration at all to complete radical reform.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton advocates for government intervention to ease the student debt burden.

“We need to transform how much higher education costs--and how those costs get paid,” Clinton wrote in a post on Medium on Aug. 10, 2015.

If elected, Clinton plans to enact “The New College Compact.” Through this program, she promises to dedicate $350 billion over the next 10 years solely to making college more affordable. With this plan in action, students would be able to access two-year level higher education at no cost.

The goal of Clinton’s approach builds upon that of President Barack Obama and mirrors the America’s College Promise program that was launched by the Obama Administration last year.

Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders, however, favors a more radical approach: tuition-free college education.

“I want every kid in this country who has the ability to be able to go to a public college or university tuition-free,” Sanders said during the NBC News Democratic Candidates Debate.

Sanders’ “College for All Act” includes a reduced student loan interest to 2 percent and free education at both two-year and four-year public institutions.

He plans to pay for his education initiative by rebuilding America’s infrastructure and preventing major corporations from hoarding millions of dollars while not paying their taxes. Sanders ensures that his tuition-free education plan would be paid for by Wall Street taxes.

“We bailed out Wall Street, now it is Wall Street’s time to help the middle class,” Sanders said.

On the other side of the aisle, Republican front-runner Donald Trump has no firm policy regarding student loan reform but has expressed contempt towards the federal government for making a profit off of student loans.

“That’s probably one of the only things the government shouldn’t make money off.

I think it’s terrible that one of the only profit centers we have is student loans,” Trump shared in an interview with the Hill on July 22, 2015.

To ease the burden of student loans, Trump claims that, if elected, rather than raise the minimum wage, he would create jobs for students that pay five times the minimum wage, in hopes of easing students’ financial debts.

Unlike most of the other candidates with firm opinions on the issue, Republican candidate Ted Cruz’s approach continues to vacillate. Although he claims to empathize with students, having recently paid off $100,000 of

his student loan bill, last year he voted against a bill that would have helped student loan borrowers refinance their loans at a lower rate.

And Republican candidate Marco Rubio recently introduced “The Dynamic Repayment Act,” a bipartisan bill to aid the current student loan debt crisis. Through this bill, federal loan borrowers would automatically join a repayment plan based on their income. Ten percent of their earnings would be paid toward student loans every month directly from their paychecks. These payments would be limited at $10,000 each year. However, those who choose to not prepay their loans could do so without negative repercussions.

Most of the front-runners for both parties have developed their own particular solutions to reform the education and student loan crisis. Although there is much disagreement as to which is the best approach, in the end, only one candidate will get to test their plan and see if it sinks or swims.

GUN CONTROL The famous statement written in the United States Constitution sparked discussions over gun rights as early as the late 1790s, which have definitely not lessened over the years.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

After the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2013, President Barack Obama started to take action for a four-part gun control plan: ending background check loopholes, banning assault weapons, increasing safety at schools and widening access to mental health services. However, the current Republican majority Congress did not pass any new legislation that was outlined in Obama’s plans for gun control.

The debate on gun control has become a primary and heated topic in the 2016 presidential election race between both parties.

According to a recent survey from the Pew Research Center, 88 percent of Democrats support background checks for guns sold and bought at gun shows and through private sales. That same poll revealed that 79 percent of Republicans held this same view.

However, Republican presidential candidates continue to advocate against gun control and in favor of protecting Second Amendment rights.

Leading in the national polls for the GOP nomination race, candidate Donald Trump strongly vows that he will protect the Second Amendment right of American citizens, not including criminals and those with mental illnesses. He believes that background checks are a broken system, gun and magazine bans are a total failure and a concealed carry permit should work in all 50 states.

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon,” Trump said on his campaign website. “Period.”

Other Republican candidates agree.

Responding to the San Bernardino terrorist attack in December of 2015, fellow Republican candidate Ted Cruz criticized Democrats who are using “this tragedy as an excuse to take away law abiding citizens’ rights to defend themselves.” Writing for the National Review, Cruz used quotes from historical fig-

11 ures like Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in his argument aiding the Second Amendment.

Like other Republican presidential candidates, Jeb Bush criticizes Democrats “like President Obama and Hillary Clinton [who] will seize on every opportunity to advance a gun-grabbing agenda. For them, it is not about reducing crime rates – it is about restricting gun-rights for all Americans.”

Yet, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a constant voice for progun control.

“It makes no sense that bipartisan legislation supporting background checks failed in Congress despite overwhelming support from the public,” Clinton said at a speech in Ohio in September of 2015.

In her campaign, Clinton has promised her supporters that, if elected, she will end loopholes allowing criminals and the mentally ill access to guns, invoke comprehensive federal background check legislation and advocate against the so-called “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act,” which prevents gun violence victims from holding manufacturers and dealers responsible for crimes committed with firearms.

Although the Democratic side is widely associated with fighting for stricter gun control legislation, candidate Bernie Sanders - from Vermont, a state with relaxed gun restrictions - believes in a more neutral solution in this debate. His solution is to allow gun rights to those who wish to use them securely and safely as to not harm fellow citizens.

“So obviously, we need strong sensible gun control, and I will support it,” Sanders said in an NPR interview last June. “But some people think it’s going to solve all of our problems, and it’s not.”

However, the mainly red state of Texas disagrees with the Democratic stance on gun control. In an ongoing poll on ISideWith.com, 63 percent of Texas voted no to increased gun control laws.

HEALTH CARE After the highly debated Affordable Care Act, commonly known as ObamaCare, passed in 2010, the topic of health care has been heavily debated in the elections, and as of 2014, only 36 percent of Democrats support this act.

The goal of ObamaCare is to provide affordable and quality health insurance to more Americans and to decrease health care spending. The Act requires those who do not own insurance through their companies to buy coverage or, otherwise, pay a fine. In addition, it places limits on insurance companies on their do’s and dont’s in terms of eligibility and coverage.

On the Democratic side, candidate Hillary Clinton stated that her biggest political regret was failing to follow through with healthcare reform in the 1990s during her term as First Lady. She believes that healthcare is a basic right that needs to be available for all citizens.

She also recently announced a plan to increase autism insurance and find a cure for Alzheimer’s disease by 2025 through the investment of $2 billion a year for research.

Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders has in turn criticized Clinton for being vague with her health care plans, and he has intro-

duced a “Medicare for all” proposal which could reduce Medicare costs by around $6 trillion from 2017 to 2026. However, taxes on the wealthy upper class would be raised at least twenty five percent in order to pay for this initiative.

On the other side of the aisle, Republican candidate Ben Carson wrote an op-ed featured in The Boston Globe that discussed his plan for “Health Empowerment Accounts,” or HEAs, which would be available to all who have a valid Social Security number. These accounts would allow Americans to create tax-free accounts and to pay for health care until they meet their insurance deductible.

He has also spoken on his desire to repeal ObamaCare, and in October 2013, Carson stated that the act was “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

Republican Ted Cruz is also in favor of repealing large sections of ObamaCare and looks to the Health Care Choice Act to replace it. This act looks to remove ObamaCare’s expensive insurance and in turn, allow citizens from one state to buy an insurance plan from any other state.

Marco Rubio wrote for Politico that he has three main priorities in his healthcare system. First, he plans to work with Congress to allow all Americans to purchase insurance with a refundable tax credit. He also strives for insurance reforms which include lower costs and advanced protection, and lastly with his plan, Rubio will place Medicare and Medicaid on fiscally-sustainable paths, like a per-capita block grant system.

John Kasich campaigns a “new, conservative vision” to replace ObamaCare whose first step is to establish a primary care system that helps long term health. Then, he plans to reward value over volume with episode-based payments.

Donald Trump, on CBS’s 60 Minutes, also referred to ObamaCare as a “total disaster” that “will shut down the country” and supports universal health care. Speaking on the 42 million and growing uninsured Americans, Trump said that he “will take care of everybody” with an affordable and advanced single-payer plan.

Although repealing ObamaCare seems to be a common thread with Republicans, the Act has provided millions of Americans with health care. So with the upcoming elections, a question remains: Will I still have health care by the end of 2016?

IMMIGRATION On June 16, 2015, one entrepreneur stood before a crowd in his Fifth Ave. skyscraper and announced that he planned on running for the presidency. During his 45-minute ad-libbed speech, this man sparked a controversial conversation about immigration with one comment.

“I will build a great wall — and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me —and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”

This infamous Donald Trump quote has branded the real-estate mogul’s campaign for the 2016 Republican nomination. While pundits on both sides of the aisle have harangued Trump for this $8 billion dollar infrastructure plan, the criticisms have bounced off Trump’s

somewhat impervious image, and he continues to commend himself for bringing the topic of immigration to the forefront of this election.

Trump has indeed shone a spotlight on this contentious issue, forcing candidates in both parties to take a clear, distinct stance.

For example, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have repeatedly attacked each other on their “flip-flopping” stances on amnesty versus legal immigration.

However, immigration is not a new subject in American history. Starting in the 1920s, the United States used a quota system to determine the immigration of various minorities, but this system received significant criticism for discriminating against Eastern Europeans seeking a home in the U.S. By the 1960s, the civil rights movement led to more discussions of immigration reform, prompting President John F. Kennedy to deem the quota system “intolerable.”

Following Kennedy’s assassination, Congress eventually passed the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. While marking a dramatic shift in ideology regarding immigration, this act did not significantly expand upon immigration reform as it still enforced caps on per country immigration, but total immigration, especially from Asia and Eastern Europe, tripled in the following decades.

The 1980s and 1990s brought immigration back into political debate, resulting in the Immigration Reform Act of 1986 and the Immigration Act of 1990. These two pieces of legislation enforced immigration policy, improved the process for legal citizenship, increased the total level of immigration and provided amnesty for more than three million illegal immigrants.

However, following the terrorist attacks on 9/11, the Bush administration strengthened border control under the new Department of Homeland Security. President Obama has taken a more moderate approach to immigration policy with his 2014 executive order, which focused on deportation of felons, not families. This executive order also protects families who have illegally entered the country from deportation if they consent to background checks and paying taxes.

In June 2014, a Gallup poll showed that 63 percent of adults in the U.S. viewed immigration as a good thing, while 33 percent viewed it as a bad thing. By June 2015, the same Gallup poll showed that 73 percent of adults viewed immigration as a good thing and only 24 percent viewed it as having a negative effect on the United States.

The poll in 2002 showed the greatest disapproval of immigration at 42 percent and since then, the numbers have slowly decreased as Americans’ fears regarding immigration and its link to national security have diminished.

However, the deep red state of Texas still maintains its fear regarding illegal immigration, partially due to the proximity of the Mexican border. A 2015 University of Texas/ Texas Tribune Poll showed that 22 percent of Texans view immigration as the greatest threat to the United States, while only 18 percent of Texans view foreign terrorist groups as the greatest threat. As a result, candidates who take harsh stances on border patrol and stopping “amnesty” programs may have support in the Texas primary.

Such candidates include Trump, Ben Carson and Cruz, who all support the building of a fence, end of birthright citizenship and no path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants. So called “establishment” Republicans, such as Jeb Bush, Rubio, and John Kasich, have taken more moderate stances on immigration by either supporting birth-right citizenship, path to legal status for unauthorized immigrants or even a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants.

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have shown support for Obama’s actions on immigration and hope to build upon the progress he has made.

While Trump did not start the conversation about immigration, his comments did bring this issue to the forefront of the debates, for better or for worse.

ISIS

Friday, Nov. 13: attacks at a concert hall, stadium, restaurants and bars left 130 people dead and hundreds wounded. Coverage of the horrific Paris attacks permeated nearly every news source that night, and the world was left in shock.

The following morning, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, also referred to as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, claimed responsibility for the attacks.

Three months later, at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Feb. 9, Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, testified that “[ISIS] will probably attempt to conduct additional attacks in Europe, and attempt direct attacks on the U.S. homeland in 2016.”

However, the group didn’t always have such violent capabilities; in fact, to understand ISIL and its source of power, one must go back in time.

After the death of Prophet Muhammad, the founder of Islam, in 632 AD, there was much debate over who should be the next caliph, or the political and religious successor of the prophet for the Islamic community. This debate led to a divide between Muslims—one minority group, the Shias, believed that the leadership should stay within the prophet’s family, while the majority group, the Sunnis, believed that the leadership should fall to an elite member of the community. Overtime, many other splits occurred after the Shia-Sunni schism, yet both groups share the same fundamental beliefs. They do, however, differ on issues of theology, doctrine and religious law.

ISIL’s goal revolves around this split.

They hope to restore a dynamic that existed nearly 10 centuries ago—a global caliphate (an Islamic state led by a caliph) of Wahhabi Sunni Islam. Wahhabism, a branch of Sunni Islam, is a fundamentalist Islamic order that emphasizes a strict interpretation of the holy book of Islam, the Qur’an.

In the territory it already controls, ISIL uses Wahhabi beliefs and sharia law, the legal system of Islam based upon the actions and words of Prophet Muhammad, to rule the land. There are other individuals and countries around the world that practice Wahhabism and live under sharia law; however, these people and places practice the true form of Islam and promote peace and security, while ISIL follows principles of violence.

Despite their obsolete opinions, ISIL’s presence is relatively new. The U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the emergence of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Founded by Jordanian Abu

Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist group focused on removing the foreign occupation of Iraq, overthrowing the democratic leadership and implementing a radical Sunni Islamist regime. Later on, al-Qaeda in Iraq renamed itself the Islamic State of Iraq. When Syria entered a civil conflict in 2011, al-Qaeda in Iraq sent multiple operatives to Sunni areas in Syria to establish a terrorist cell in the region.

In April 2013, current ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who took over after Zarqawi’s death, separated from al-Qaeda due to differing ideologies and became the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Currently, ISIL is attempting to expand its presence throughout the Middle East and targets anyone that tries to stop them.

The two factors that assist ISIL in its mission are its forces, consisting of hundreds of fighters and organized hierarchies, and money. Oil continues to be ISIL’s primary financial source, along with taxes and extortion rackets, robberies and kidnapping ransom.

Additionally, the political and economic instability under Bashar al-Assad, the president of Syria, has certainly allowed ISIL to thrive.

According to Matthew Levitt, the director of the Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at the Washington Institute, ISIL is making approximately $40 to $50 million each month—nearly $600 million a year.

ISIL is a central topic in many of the 2016 presidential debates.

Hillary Clinton has advocated for more allied planes and more strikes on ISIL bases in Iraq and Syria. Clinton also emphasized that it would be a mistake to send in ground troops, even if there is an attack on U.S. soil.

Bernie Sanders and Clinton agree that Gulf countries need to partner with the U.S. and share intelligence to cut off ISIL’s income and defeat the organization. However, Sanders has advocated to work with Russia in the past, despite the fact that Russia supports Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, has previously stated that all mosques in the U.S. should be shut down to eradicate terrorism.

Trump also favors heavily bombing “every single inch” of ISIL’s territory.

Ted Cruz would like the U.S. government to pass a bill he introduced last year called the Expatriate Terrorist Act, which would allow government officials to remove U.S. citizenship from any individual suspected of supporting terrorist groups. He believes in formally declaring war against ISIL, and has stated that he would “carpet bomb them into oblivion.”

Marco Rubio expressed that the U.S. should keep Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. by enforcing no-fly zones in Syria and reversing mandatory defense spending cuts. Like Clinton and Sanders, he emphasized that a coalition of troops from various countries in the Middle East along with U.S. support will be necessary.

Ben Carson has expressed somewhat similar sentiments; Carson said that he would use every resource available to defeat ISIL. He also urges that the U.S. should help broker a ceasefire in Syria, which he believes can be done by creating a coalition government in the country.

Like other candidates, John Kasich also called for a worldwide coalition consisting of NATO countries and Middle East nations to fight ISIL. Kasich additionally favors no-fly zones and arming the Kurds, an ethnic group in the Middle East that opposes ISIL.

13

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE The United States Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage on June 26, 2015 in Obergefell vs. Hodges, stating that state-level bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional. Even so, the 2016 presidential candidates remain divided on the issue.

The two Democratic candidates, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, are supportive of same-sex marriage.

Sanders has supported same-sex marriage and gay rights for his entire political career. He attended the first Pride Parade in 1983, held in New York City, and voted against President Bill Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in 1993 and the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. Sanders sponsors the Equality Act, which would reiterate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include rights of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Clinton, however, has changed her views in accordance with those of the general public.

During her time in the senate and as a presidential candidate in 2008, she opposed samesex marriage. Now that the majority of Americans support it, she does too.

All of the Republican candidates oppose same-sex marriage for a variety of reasons.

Donald Trump has consistently opposed same-sex marriage and has expressed support for the First Amendment Defense Act, which would victimize the LGBTQIA+ community to more discrimination. After the Supreme Court ruling in 2015, Trump stated that he disagreed with the decision but that he did not support a constitutional amendment to overthrow the ruling. Trump later contradicted this statement when he said that if elected president, he would appoint Supreme Court judges to overturn the ruling. Trump has not expressed reasons why he is opposed.

Marco Rubio shares Trump’s sentiment, and would also appoint Supreme Court judges to reverse rulings such as this one. And many candidates oppose same-sex marriage due to religious reasons.

Ted Cruz, another consistent opponent of the ruling, argues against same-sex marriage for reasons regarding “religious liberty” and has made his opposition to gay equality a primary focus of his campaign. For example, Cruz supports a constitutional amendment that would prevent the federal government from acknowledging marriage equality.

Ben Carson has said that marriage equality is “inconsistent with [his] religious beliefs” and does not believe it to be a civil right. He believes that the Supreme Court should fire any judge who supports it, similar to Trump and Rubio. Despite his beliefs, Carson has not developed any specific executive order to develop as president.

But other candidates believe that the institution of marriage can only exist between one man and one woman.

As governor of Florida, Jeb Bush also maintained an active opposition against samesex marriage due to his beliefs of the traditional marriage institution between a man and a woman. John Kasich revealed that he does not support the LGBT “lifestyle.” In the past, he has voted against DOMA and supported Ohio’s amendment to ban same-sex marriage. This view contradicts his statement in the first Republican debate, in which he said that he would support anyone who was gay.

It is clear that the candidates are divided on this issue in accordance to the party’s beliefs.

ON THE ISSUES: STUDENTS VS. FACULTY Students Should the children of illegal immigrants be granted citizenship?

No 20%

74% Yes I don’t care 6%

Do you support the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No 7%

88% Yes I don’t care 5%

Do you support stricter gun control?

No 16%

78% Yes I don’t care 6%

Do you support Obamacare?

No 29%

51% Yes I don’t care 20%

Faculty Should the children of illegal immigrants be granted citizenship?

No 31%

67% Yes I don’t care 3%

Do you support the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No 18%

82% Yes

Do you support stricter gun control?

No 21%

79% Yes

Do you support Obamacare?

No 33%

64% Yes I don’t care 3%

Results from Hockaday polls conducted by The Fourcast’s Amanda Kim. The faculty survey had 41 responses. The student survey had 129 responses.

T the votes Electoral Process

The Fourcast shares information about the electoral college and the primary voting procedures in order to inform the student body.

Stories by Austria Arnold, Sonya Xu and Mary Orsak.

he Electoral College is a topic of common confusion during presidential elections. For starters, the Electoral College is not a place. It is a process of compromise between a popular vote and a vote in Congress. The Electoral College began with the Founding Fathers, and its origin can be found in Article II Section 1 of the Constitution. It was established because a large percentage of the population could not read or write when the United States was founded.

Contrary to popular belief, presidential candidates are not elected by popular vote.

So, when an individual goes to the polls, he or she actually votes for an elector who represents his or her party’s candidate. The electors chosen by each state are called the Electoral College, and these are the people who officially elect the president and vice president. The number of electors in each state is determined by its number of senators and members of the House of Representatives combined.

Maine and Nebraska can both split votes in the Electoral College. This is because these states provide two electoral votes to the state’s popular vote winner and then split the rest of the electoral votes between congressional districts. The popular vote winner in these congressional districts then garners

the allotted electoral votes. This creates a possibility of split electoral votes from one state. This occurred for the first time in Nebraska during the 2008 election.

In the event that no candidate gets a minimum of 270 votes in the Electoral College, a vote takes place in the House of Representatives. Each state delegation has one vote in which they can select one of the top three candidates from the original vote. In this case, the Senate chooses the vice president between the two vice presidential candidates who finished at the top of the original election by allowing each senator one vote.

A president can win the election without winning the popular vote. This has occurred three times in history: during the elections of Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George W. Bush.

While the necessity of the Electoral College is often debated, it has been in use for hundreds of years. Nonetheless, over 700 recommendations have been presented to Congress regarding the Electoral College.

Generally, this system is believed to hurt the chances of third party candidates. Despite the frustration that many citizens have regarding the Electoral College, there is no sign of reform to this part of the political system in the coming years.

WHO CAN VOTE? • U.S. Citizens 18 years old on Election Day, but you can register to vote when you are 17 years and 10 months.

• Resident of the county where you submit the application.

• You are not a convicted felon. However, you may be eligible if you have completed your sentence.

• A court has not declared you to be totally mentally incapacitated or partially mentally incapacitated.

3. After applying, you will receive a voter registration certificate in the mail within 30 days. If you do not move, you will receive another certificate every two years.

HOW DO I REGISTER TO VOTE? 1. Fill out an application. You can get it from the County Voter Registrar’s office, the Secretary of State’s Office, libraries, post offices or high schools. a. You can also request one online and the state will send you one. b. OR you can fill out the application online and then mail it in. c. When you renew your driver’s license, you may also register to vote.

2. Hand deliver or mail the application postage-free to the County Voter Registrar or the County Voter Registrar’s office. If you live in Dallas County, mail or deliver your application to: 2377 North Stemmons Frwy, Suite 820 Dallas 75207.

VOTING IN THE PRIMARIES • Registered voters can vote for the candidate for the party’s nomination.

• Two main types of primaries: a. Closed primary: voter can only vote for the party that he/she is affiliated with (i.e. a registered Democratic voter can only vote in the Democratic primary and a registered Republican voter can only vote in the Republican primary). b. Open primary: a registered voter can vote in either primary, but can only vote in one primary.

VOTING DAY REMINDERS • You can only vote in a specific area or precinct depending on where you live. Your precinct number will be on your voter registration certificate.

• Your County Election’s Office has more information on voting locations or you can check online where you should go to vote.

• Polling stations are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on election day.

• Bring your voter registration certificate and driver’s license or other form of ID.

15

the early primaries March 1

Feb 9 March 1

March 1 Feb 20 (D) Feb 23 (R) March 1

March 1

March 1

March 1 March 1

March 1

Feb 20 (D) Feb 23 (R)

March 1 March 1

Iowa Hillary 49.9% Bernie Sanders 49.6% Ted Cruz 28% Donald Trump 24%

New Hampshire Bernie Sanders 60% Hillary Clinton 38% Donald Trump 35% John Kasich 16%

Nevada (D) Hillary Clinton 56% Bernie Sanders 44%

WHY DOES SUPER TUESDAY MATTER? uper Tuesday is the crucial test for the candidates as the elections on this day take place in some of the nation’s most diverse states with large Latino and African American populations. As a result of this diversity, these key elections can be a great indicator of the success of a candidate in a general election.

More importantly, 632 delegates for the Republican national convention are up for grabs as well as 1,007 delegates for the Democratic national convention. To win the Republican nomination, a candidate must win at least 1,237 delegates; to win the Democratic nomination, a candidate must win at least 2,383 delegates. With both parties awarding at least half of the necessary delegates on Super Tuesday, a strong showing in these states will be necessary to win the nomination.

S super tuesday Primary Season Story by Mary Orsak

This year, Texas will be among the 13 states that will hold at least one of their primary elections on March 1, a date more commonly known as Super Tuesday.

This term refers to the date when the greatest number of states hold their primary elections to select the delegates to the national party conventions, where that party’s presidential nominee will be selected.

DOES THE TEXAS PRIMARY MATTER? The simple answer is Yes. With 155 delegates to the Republican national convention and 252 delegates to the Democratic national convention, Texas awards the most delegates of any Super Tuesday state.

The importance of the Texas primary election is not lost on the candidates. Super PACs, although nominally not affiliated with any of the candidates, have invested $273,000 in campaign initiatives in the Lone Star State, according to the Washington Post.

South Carolina (R) Donald Trump 33% Marco Rubio 22.5% Ted Cruz 22.3%

Graphic by Katie O’Meara Source: Bing Political Index

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Texas Republican Chairman Steve Munisteri said, “Texas will be the 800-pound gorilla in 2016. It’s a big, early prize, and it will put a premium on those that have name recognition in the state, money and a political base.”

WHO IS PREDICTED TO WIN ON THIS DAY? According to polls conducted by Public Policy Polling, Hillary Clinton is predicted to win in 10 of the 12 Super Tuesday Democratic primaries due to the large number of black voters in these diverse states who tend to flock to Clinton over her opponent, Bernie Sanders. Clinton leads Sanders in Texas by 23 points. However, Sanders leads in the northern states of Vermont and Massachusetts by 76 and 7 points respectively.

While Clinton is the clear Democratic leader on Super Tuesday, the Republican race will prove to be much more contentious. In a Real Clear Politics average of the most recent polls, Ted Cruz leads in his home state of Texas by approximately seven points, followed by Donald Trump and Marco Rubio.

Although Cruz may win big in Texas, Trump leads in most other Super Tuesday primary polls, such as Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee and Oklahoma. In order to win the nomination, Republican candidates will need to challenge front-runner Trump in many of these states to try to gain some of the 632 delegates.

ALEENA TARIQ

the opinions Hockaday Views

Several Hockaday students share their perspectives about the 2016 election.

VIRGINIA BESHEARS

Co-President of Young Democrats

Co-President of Young Independents

We’ve all heard the same rhetoric on the news from Bernie Sanders: “the middle class of this country is shrinking, almost all of the new income in this country is going to the top one percent, we have to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, there is something fundamentally wrong in this country when the top onetenth of one percent owns as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.” But if we can overlook the inherent repetitiveness of Bernie Sanders and dig deeper into the issues that he is bringing to light, we see a different story.

Anyone who supports Sanders for president understands that he is fighting a fight towards which no other candidates have even tipped their hats yet. What he is trying to do is get the middle class moving again by targeting the root cause of its suffering: a broken, corrupt campaign finance system that originated with the 2010 Citizens United vs.

Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision, which ruled that corporations could spend unlimited amounts of money supporting any given candidate. In fact, Sanders has refused to associate with a Super PAC, or a political action committee, through which he could potentially funnel large sums of money towards his campaign. Instead, he has received over 3 million individual contributions with an average donation of $27—and he’s proud of it.

Sanders does have a lot of agreement with other Democrats on many economic issues, save for one: Healthcare. Sanders, though impressed with the work done by President Obama and so many others on the Affordable Care Act, believes that work on providing healthcare free-of-cost to all citizens is not done yet. This is why Sanders believes that the U.S. should move to a single-payer healthcare system in which all citizens can receive free healthcare.

And though it may seem that way, Sanders’ platform is not merely limited to the aforementioned points. In fact, he has been a trailblazer on social issues, whether it be criminal justice reform, same-sex marriage, women’s health issues or marijuana legalization, issues that he supported long before many other candidates did. He worked to end housing segregation at his alma mater, the University of Chicago, in 1962, participated in the March on Washington with Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1963, and protested Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in the 1990s. Sanders has also been a leader on the issue of climate change.

He has fought hard throughout his House and Senate careers against the interests of big oil and drilling companies in order to preserve our environment.

All of that, plus he can do a killer Larry David impression.

Everyone’s heard the saying, “If you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” If I were to follow this advice I would be unable to discuss the 2016 Presidential Election.

Are these candidates the best America has to offer? Every single option is either embarrassing, reprehensible or both.

The front-runner in this Miss Cringe-Worthy pageant is obviously Donald Trump. His corn husk hair and Nazi-esque ideology leave me bewildered that he has more than two supporters. Ted Cruz, coming in as our pageant queen’s runner up, made an appearance at a Death to the Gays Rally in November 2015.

Although Hillary Clinton may not be rushing to marginalize an entire group of people, her campaign strategy of “whip and nae nae-ing” her way to the Presidency causes me physical pain.

Ben Carson made the statement that “ObamaCare is the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.” 9/11 must have slipped his mind.

Jeb Bush’s palpable fear of Trump’s verbal abuse during debates doesn’t inspire much confidence. It does, however, inspire me to give him a hug (it’ll be okay, Jeb).

Marco Rubio reminds me of a highly confident but ill-prepared high school debater.

Bernie Sanders is possibly the least embarrassing candidate although he is, as Saturday Night Live said, “a human Birkenstock.”

And, of course, there’s the “In Memoriam” for the hoard of cringe-worthy candidates we’ve lost along the way.

Lincoln Chafee, my favorite ex-blacksmith, once described himself as a “block of granite” during a debate.

Mike Huckabee thinks that Dred Scott is the “law of the land,” and that “black people aren’t fully human.”

You may remember Jim Webb, who, during a debate, referred to the time he killed a guy.

On a more positive note, this sideshow actually has a beneficial impact. Over the past months, I have heard more discussion about this election than any other political event in my lifetime. This group of candidates is provoking much needed discussion. Why? In large part because we are frustrated and uneasy about the future. Also, because this group of potential world leaders has us on the edge of our seats. What will they say or do next? Regardless, engagement is good. A greater number of politically active citizens can’t help but create change. The fact that our political system has become so polarized needs to be addressed. The 2016 Election might just be what pushes our country to examine ourselves.

17

GABRIA PEARSON

INAARA PADANI

HEIDI KIM

Co-President of Young Republicans

Managing Editor, The Fourcast

Staff Writer, The Fourcast

I was introduced to Ted Cruz when I made personal home calls for his senatorial campaign. This was the first campaign that I had ever worked on.

Our country is in desperate need for a change in leadership. Texas Sen. Cruz has promised to repeal every word of Obamacare in his first term which would give us more free market alternatives to choose from such as buying insurance across state lines which will invite competition and lower prices. This will bring down the total cost of coverage for everyone which gives charities and insurance companies the resources to help the less fortunate with more opportunities. Ted Cruz has a plan to do just that.

In addition to that, Cruz says he believes school choice is the civil rights issue of the 21st century.

“We need to repeal Common Core. We need to get the federal government out of the business of dictating educational standards.

Education is far too important for it to be governed by unelected bureaucrats in Washington. It should be at the state level or even better at the local level,” he said.

While Cruz supports increases in defense spending, he does not favor long-term military occupations and state-building. He has called the 2003 invasion of Iraq a mistake and has also said the military campaigns in both Iraq and Afghanistan have carried on too long.

“It is not the job of our military to produce democratic utopias across the world,” Cruz said in 2014, adding that the U.S. military, when approaching conflicts, “should go in with overwhelming force, and then we should get the heck out.”

Ted Cruz will defend our Second Amendment rights. We have the right to protect ourselves with a gun if we so choose. Some politicians have even commented that they would like to strike it from the Constitution if at all possible. Ted Cruz believes that we should defend this right with the same vigor as we defend our First Amendment rights.

I truly believe that Ted Cruz has a great plan to “Reignite the Promise of America.”

Arguing, name-calling and a whole lot of yelling. No, unfortunately, I’m not describing “Keeping Up with the Kardashians”—I’m talking about the 2016 Presidential Election, perhaps the realest reality TV show to ever grace America.

And of course, Donald Trump is the star.

This election season has seen its fair share of jaw-dropping and heart-breaking moments alike. The episode that aired on Feb. 13 from Greenville, South Carolina was quite vicious to say the least: Trump called Ted Cruz “the single biggest liar,” and Marco Rubio insulted Cruz’s Spanish speaking abilities.

But perhaps the greatest tragedy that has occurred thus far took place on the night of Feb. 20, when Jeb Bush announced that he was leaving the show—an event that inspired the creation of numerous memes and videos in remembrance of Bush’s campaign.

Frankly, this is what the election has come down to. Within the past few months, the most respected occupation in the U.S. has turned into somewhat of a joke. Civility and political correctness have been tossed out the window, leaving behind a mayhem of men (plus Hillary Clinton) with heated opinions.

I’ve only been alive long enough to see three presidents in office, but I’m almost certain that this isn’t how an election is supposed to be. At least it’s not how I want it to be.

One of these candidates is going to be the next president, yet some of the statements that they have made are simply appalling.

Time and time again, Trump has referred to Latino immigrants as “criminals” and “rapists,” while Cruz has stated that the U.S. should only open its borders to Christian refugees because there is no “meaningful risk” that Christians will execute acts of terror. Whatever happened to ethnic and religious tolerance? Isn’t that what America prides itself on?

And it’s not just the Republican nominees that have dabbled in gray area—the Democrats have their fair share of controversies as well. Whether Hillary Clinton likes it or not, the infamous email scandal is going to follow her around for the remainder of her political career, and some voters may choose not to trust Clinton because of this.

It seems as if the many traits that a president should uphold—integrity, basic humanity, grace under pressure and an optimistic mindset—are nowhere to be found in this election. This is not to say that the candidates are unqualified; many of them have implemented beneficial policies and made necessary change. But I can’t shake the feeling that the race for presidency has become exactly that: a race. It’s a competition that everyone is trying to win, and they’re willing to step over one another to do so.

Politics. An eight letter word that refers to the contest for power in our current governmental system. As a young student at the ripe age of 17, soon to be 18, I often find myself wondering, “What change do I want to see in our government?” Or better yet, “What change can I make in it?”

I am often surrounded by the words of my peers, as they complain, exasperated, “Why should I care? My opinion won’t change anything.”

For me, this popular belief is disappointing. As part of arguably one of the most driven generations, in my opinion, simply surrendering to the idea that “young people cannot make a difference” is misguided.

Although it may not seem apparent on the surface, our generation’s voice will be heard and definitely has the potential to make a difference. Each vote, cast or not, impacts the results of the upcoming election. While every vote towards one candidate helps his or her chance of winning, every vote not placed actually also has the same impact.

More radical campaigns, such as that of Sen. Bernie Sander’s, have become particularly popular among the youngest voting group. Why? Because our generation has been known for being the one that does not accept traditional beliefs, but instead chooses to challenge the norm and not take no for an answer.

A key focus for the Democratic party is on the student loan crisis. Sanders plans to conduct a solution that will make four-year colleges be tuition-free and finance a tax on Wall Street trades, thus decreasing the financial debt for many students. As a result, his campaign especially intrigues the younger voters, who are soon heading off to university.

As a rising senior and only a year and half away from preparing to head off into the world as a college student, I cannot see a more important time to start worrying about these issues. Many college applicants find themselves bound by their financial limits, as the tuition for universities continues to increase annually. So when there are politicians standing up at a platform and promising “free public education,” I think it is time to listen up.

Whether we as part of the youngest generation of voters realize it or not, we are affected by many of the issues that are being debated about. Even topics like reforming America’s health care program are factors we must take into consideration. The 2016 presidential election does impact us and will continue to as we progress even further in our journey into college and eventually, into adulthood.

If you ask me, I think that there is truly no better time to start concerning ourselves with the way our government is run.

I the media Moderates: The Unsung Heroes of Politics Story by Mary Orsak

n modern politics, the media serves as the greatest platform for candidates. Those whose names are plastered in headlines, regardless of the content of the article, gain the most attention, leading to coverage of these candidates in a vicious cycle. Teddy Roosevelt said it best, “The most successful politician is he who says what the people are thinking most often in the loudest voice.”

This truth, beneficial to elections or not, produces the successful campaigns of media superstar and acclaimed loudmouth, Donald Trump; the Tea Party filibustering junior senator, Ted Cruz; and even the old but not soft-spoken revolutionary, Bernie Sanders.

These candidates dazzle the crowds at prime-time debates with zingers such as Trump’s infamous insult “[Jeb Bush] has failed in this campaign; it’s been a total disaster. Nobody cares.” Cruz made brazen attack on the whole state of New York and Sanders has a constant cry for the American Revolution part II. These quotes draw in viewers and media coverage.

As entertaining as these political fireworks are, I wish that sometimes we would give the less exciting but still qualified candidates of this campaign a shot. With the meteoric rise of Marco Rubio and the success of front-runner Hillary Clinton, some may say that moderates have gotten their shot at the White House.

However, I think our moderate radar is thrown a bit out of whack with Sarah Palin’s “right-winging, gun-slinging” Tea Party candidates and our so-left-that-he-may-noteven-be-considered-a-Democrat Sanders.

Clinton and Rubio are more establishment candidates than they are moderates; they stick to the base of their party.

True moderates have included the pragmatic and technocratic governors (and former governors) of Ohio, Florida and New Jersey: John Kasich, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie.

You can even throw former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore and former mayor Michael Bloomberg in the mix.

These Republican men, with some exceptions, maintain their fiscal conservative values while also harboring some socially liberal predilections. In the first Republican debate, Kasich distinguished himself from the traditional Republican base when he spoke about same-sex marriage.

“Because somebody doesn’t think the way I do doesn’t mean that I can’t care about them or can’t love them. So if one of my daughters happened to be [homosexual], of course I would love them and I would accept them,” he said.

According to an NBC News/Esquire Poll, 51 percent of Americans are considered

moderates. With such a large moderate population, one would expect the success of these governors. However, only one of these moderates still stands: Kasich.

The media has a tendency to be attracted to the outliers, to tell the stories of the underdog outsider candidates. Even I have fallen into the snare of the media magnate, Donald Trump.

We, journalists, typically do not like Trump or his policies but love to cover his bombastic demagoguery; he is just entertaining.

I would probably read an article entitled “Donald Trump insults this minority group” over a story with the headline “John Kasich’s policy on providing health care.” Wouldn’t we all?

For democracy to work, all candidates need a fair hearing. It cannot simply be a popularity contest amongst those who garner the most media attention.

While money may buy the public’s attention for a little while, candidates’ intrinsic entertainment value trumps all. Take Jeb Bush for instance. According to Bush’s Federal Elections Commission filings, his campaign and associated Super PACs have raised nearly $160 million, but he only gained media attention when he openly attacked Trump. Following his crushing defeat in South Carolina, despite his older brother’s 11th-hour campaigning, Bush suspended his campaign. When Trump took the stage following his astounding South Carolina victory, he didn’t even mention Bush’s exit; it was as if Bush never ran.

It just proves that in this campaign money talks but the candidates just shout louder.

Indulge me: let us travel six years back in time. On Jan. 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United and declared that corporations and unions could spend unlimited sums of money in favor or against candidates in elections. Immediately, the cries rang out that money would dominate politics for the foreseeable future.

This may have been the case in 2012.

President Barack Obama spent $1.123 billion while his counterpart, Mitt Romney, spent $1.019 billion. I am not trying to say that Obama bought the presidency for a mere $100 million but that money allowed him to spread his message.

In this campaign season one cannot underestimate the power of personality to draw massive amounts of free media attention.

As Super Tuesday comes around the corner, be mindful of this phenomenon and consider the candidates, not for how much the media covers them, but for their ideas. When January 2017 arrives, the American people do not want a media superstar taking the oath of office but rather a qualified candidate, with sound ideas, who can enact real change that will benefit the American populus.

Now Form an Opinion.

f