Trump’s poll numbers have steadily risen. Is the Republican presidential primary over?
R: The Republican presidential primary is most likely over. I do not want Trump to win the nomination, but I do not think there is a chance of him losing the primary. Perhaps things will change once the primary voting starts, but that may be a long shot. To defeat a former or incumbent president in a primary takes a lot of skill, and I regretfully do not think any of the current candidates possess that skill. I would like to see a new nominee, like Ron DeSantis or Tim Scott, take the reins of the Republican Party, but that is not probable in this current atmosphere. Alas, the words of that old Glenn Miller song are not true; wishing will not make it so.
L: The Republican presidential primary never got off the ground– Donald Trump was always going to be the nominee. So far, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has mounted the strongest challenge to the former president. A myriad of factors– numerous unconscionable domestic policies like book bans and the “Don’t Say Gay” law, high campaign turnover, poor campaign strategy, and the governor’s inexperience in the realm of retail politics– have caused the campaign to freefall in the polls. As DeSantis declines, former UN ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is rising in the polls. Time will tell if this surge is sustainable, but Trump’s majority in the polls appears to be increasing and insurmountable. With three months to the first contest, the Republican primary is shaping up to be a competitive race for second place.
What role do student organizations have in addressing international crises?
L: Student organizations and clubs absolutely have a role in addressing international crises. Their role should not be a directly involved one— instead, the role of college clubs and organizations should be to coordinate and facilitate conversations and activities on how the college community can help those impacted by crises. If clubs or organizations choose to get involved, the primary way should be charitable in focus.
R: Student organizations have some role in addressing international crises. However, I know I may be a bit “anti-democratic” when I say that I believe people should know what they are talking about before they begin releasing statements and endorsing certain public sentimentalities. No, not everyone (every club, for that matter) has a say, and there are dumb questions and dumb sentiments. It is important for clubs to be active and guide a student body in public discourse, but that discourse (unlike the speech in our country at the moment) must be guided by objective facts, good arguments, and civility, not emotional hogwash, sophistry, and the passion of fools.
If the 2024 presidential race was between RFK Jr., Marianne Williamson, and Cornell West, and you had to vote for one of the three, who would you vote for? Why?
R: I would vote for Cornell West over RFK Jr. or Marianne Williamson. He is probably the most left-wing of the three candidates, but I enjoy his civil attitude and I respect his intellectual pedigree. I have major qualms with his positions regarding abortion or his call to abolish ICE, but I respect other positions he has taken. I greatly enjoy his support of the blue-collar workers of this country, and his call to end poverty is more than ambitious but a solid sentiment that no other candidate, on the left or right, has espoused in recent discussion. I am not saying that I am a Cornell West acolyte, but I think his candidacy has many valuable lessons for conservative and liberal politicians, and he would not be my last choice for president.
L: All three candidates are woefully uninformed about the legislative and political process, but if given the choice to vote between Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Marianne Williamson, and Cornell West, I would vote for Marianne Williamson. Kennedy Jr.’s propagation of public health misinformation, as well as his intimacy with conspiracy theories, in my view, are disqualifying. My issues with Cornell West are many– his support for third-party candidates in pivotal presidential elections is one of my biggest qualms. West has supported non-Democratic candidates in both the 2000 and 2016 elections. His and others’ support of Ralph Nader over Al Gore in 2000 and Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton in 2016, in my view, persuaded voters to support these spoiler candidates, therefore allowing George W. Bush and Donald Trump to be elected President. My vote in this hypothetical scenario is not in support or agreement with Marianne Williamson as much as it is in opposition to the more unacceptable candidates found in Kennedy Jr. and West.
If your party were to choose a new color, other than red or blue, what would it be?
L: If the Democratic Party were to choose a new color, it should be purple. Why? Because it’s my favorite color.
R: If the Republican Party were to choose another color besides red, it would be blue. First, blue is traditionally associated with conservative parties (such as the Tories in England), so it should be the color of our “conservative” party. Second, election night returns colored the Republican states blue until the 1990s (just look at NBC from the 1992 election and back). In all honesty, it is quite unusual that the liberal Democrats became associated with blue (a conservative color), while the conservative Republicans became associated with red (a socialist color). Perhaps, this is reflective of the change in political associations in America over time, as the Democrats were once the conservatives and the Republicans the liberals (albeit not socialist by any stretch of the imagination).
