So, the intense election period is quickly coming to an end. Following is a recap of this crazy past 3 weeks to assist you as you get geared up and ready to cast your final vote.  

 

From the initial polls it was evident that the class cared greatly about topics like environmental reform, gun control, the national debt, and tax and education policies. From the favorability polls after the first debate we could see that the class was strongly split between supporting Tsai’s and Weaver’s policies regarding environmental reform. Burkhimer was not as strong a contender in this area, but he wasn’t far behind. Similar opinion/candidate support trends were seen with the other major issues in the class like tax reform and gun control.  From the favorability poll after the town hall debate we could see that that class support is still pretty split between the 3 candidates on gun control (Weaver - 34.8%, Tsai - 30.4%, Burkhimer - 26.1%), environmental policies (Tsai - 30.4%, Weaver - 34.8%, Burkhimer - 17.4%), and taxes (Burkhimer - 26.1%, Weaver - 26.1% Tsai - 39.1%). The poll results indicate that the class resonates greatly with Weaver’s education policy, health care ideas and equal rights support. 

 

I had the chance to sit down with the Communications Directors from The Head First Party and The Search Party and understand their reflections on the entire campaign and their candidate’s performance. Alexa Lawrie, Weaver’s Communications Director, had nothing but praise for her candidate. She believes Weaver has a very good chance at winning and that they have run a successful campaign. She “hopes the voters can see the difference in the candidates and policies”. When asked about her reaction to the second favorability poll results (in which, Weaver is still marginally behind Tsai) she called them “ ridiculous”. She stated that it is clear that policy wise Weaver has the majority support, but when asked who they would vote for class members still vote for Tsai because “he’s louder and people remember that more than the quality of the actual ideas presented”. Overall, Lawrie commended Weaver’s performance. She believes her party has the superior ideas, especially in terms of equal rights for minorities because this is something Weaver is very “passionate and motivated” about, and thus is in a better position to win the election.

 

While interviewing Krishna Pillutla, the Communications Director for Tsai’s campaign, I got a strong condescending attitude. Pillutla stated that, “looking at the debate performances, the poll results, and the strength of his [Tsai’s] arguments”, they have a “pretty solid chance of winning”. He believes that the people want “pragmatic” solutions to society’s problems and that the Head First Party is providing that. He described his reaction to the second favorability poll results (in which Tsai is ahead, although not by a lot) as “heartwarming and uplifting”. He feels the party’s hard work has paid off. Overall, Pillutla was proud of Tsai’s debate performance noting that Tsai is very passionate and “has strong messaging and ideas”. He did however mention that sometimes Tsai’s passion caused him to “lose sight of the audience” and become “livid” towards the opposition. Way to support your candidate. Jokes aside, being able to recognize an areas of improvement is a strong quality in any potential leader and his team.

 

Although the polls were a good indication of the viewpoints of the class, I wanted to interview some specific students and understand their personal opinions on the entire campaign process. I sat down with Purvi Bharne, avid political aficionado and head of the LGBTQ+ interest group known as Spectrum. In our interview I learned that she feels that LGBTQ+ issues were addressed sufficiently in the class debates and is happy with the positions of each of the candidates. She feels, however, that Weaver has best addressed the discrimination that the LGBTQ+ community faces, and will be the best President to support their interests and rights. She also said that Weaver's campaign style appealed the most to her due to the strength of her policies and described Weaver as “one of the most genuine and humble candidates up there”. I also spoke with Helga Zeneli, leader of the Go Green Gang interest group and a very politically active citizen. She was also pleased with the way the debates turned out and mentioned that all candidates effectively addressed environmental issues and presented their possible solutions. Some points that stood out to her were Weaver’s Pollution Tax on companies to equalize the social cost of carbon and the creation of an international carbon market to decentralize costs. Zeneli cautions however that these goals will be difficult to achieve. Do you think Weaver is capable of doing what she has promised? She stated that Tsai’s plans to re-implement the Clean Water and Air Act will is extremely significant to her organization, but believes that his “outlook was shaded by the idea of creating a new Paris Climate Accord, called the Philadelphia Climate Summit”. She also says that the “Go Green Gang would like the United States to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord instead of implicating things further”.  This was something she liked about Burkhimer’s plans, along with placing stricter regulations on corporate carbon emissions and dedicating federal funding for environmental research. She liked the Darty Party’s campaigning style the most, citing their “vibrant attitudes”, “considerate viewpoint”, honesty, and Twitter and classroom presence. Ultimately, she supports Burkhimer “to help create a cleaner and greener future for us”. 

 

Now to briefly recap the debates. There is no doubt that Tsai’s was indeed the most aggressive and most memorable speaker while stating his policies. Weaver came across as very self-assured, confident, and tactfully organized. Burkhimer had notable ideas (despite being clueless on some topics like the LGBTQ+ Panic Defense), but was not able to get many of them across, as he tended to remain quiet during heating back and forths. Nevertheless, all the candidates had impressive and commendable performances. Good job. Some of the biggest takeaways: 

 

• The intense debate over how to go about gun reform in America. While Weaver and Burkhimer supported stricter regulations, mandatory background checks, assault weapon bans and a nation-wide gun registry, Tsai took a different approach by supporting a voluntary gun registry with tax incentives, claiming that it will be more effective.

• The wide range of arguments on how to approach climate change and global warming. There was obvious consensus that the issue exists and is a pressing matter, but there was no consensus on how to go about it. Burkhimer and Weaver again agreed on rejoining the Paris Climate Accord (PCA), dirty energy taxes, and subsidizing clean energy projects and research; Tsai disagreed with rejoining the PCA due to its nonbinding nature, instead proposing a binding contract with countries like India and China.

• The great passion to advance the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. All 3 promise to work for passing some form of an Equality Act/Equal Rights Act. Weaver and Tsai mentioned passing executive orders to curb the practices of companies in many states to discriminate based on sexual orientation, to end the LGBTQ+ Panic Defense gender neutral bathrooms, and banning conversion therapy. Burkhimer called upon “common sense legislation”. Tsai called Weaver out for singling out the community. All 3 expressed that they could not imagine the pain that people go through when their bodies do not reflect who they really are, and supported gender reassignment surgeries to be covered by healthcare.  Tsai called it essential for preventing suicide and saving lives.

• Weaver and Burkhimer both propose raising the top marginal rate to 50%, to pay for education and environmental plans. Tsai proposed increasing taxes overall for a new healthcare system. He also proposed something unclear about “transferring insurance supply from companies to increasing paychecks”. Tsai also was a strong advocate of accumulating all taxes centrally and then distributing them equally among all schools to standardize education across the nation. For public education, Weaver supports a national school funding formula, regulating charter schools, and prioritize funding for technical and instructional education. 

• The disagreement over military policies. When asked under what conditions each would deploy troop in situations where national security not at risk, Tsai said that pulling out undermines American strength and undermines our reputation to protect our allies and ideals. Weaver opposed him saying that Americans are dying and that we need need to cut down international intervention if a war doesn’t directly benefit us, and focus instead on internal affairs. Burkhimer’s opinions on this issue were unclear.

• The opinions on illegal immigration. All 3 support the continuation of DACA. Burkhimer wants to allow more immigrants in and expand DACA to all people, not just children. He does not support healthcare for illegal immigrants though.Weaver mostly agreed, but wants to maintain caps on immigration. Tsai completely disagreed with Weaver and was strongly against enforcing quotas. He wants to admit immigrants based on competitive merit based on a person’s background. 

 

Those were just the highlights. This was an intense series of just 2 debates. There were events out of the debates that deserve documentation as well. As you might remember there was a scandal with Burkhimer’s Communications Director, Alyssa Lanter, pretending to be a member of Tsai’s campaign to extract information from naive 11th grader Joseph Gulian. Lanter responded to this in oblivion, claiming she didn’t know Gulian and had never interacted with him. There was also significant drama over the Darty Party’s attack during the town hall on Tsai’s past, and the class although split, seemed to react negatively to this attack with 43.5% believing that it was too harsh. There was also observable partisanship on Twitter, with peers rallying to support either Weaver, Tsai, or the Darty Party by racking up likes, comments, and retweets. Regardless, the drama definitely added some juice into the election and attracted great levels of participation.

 

At the end of the first debate, Tsai seemed to be the obvious front runner although their remained a significant portion of the class that was undecided and could tip the election either of the 3 ways. After the second debate, Tsai is still in the lead with 43.5% of class voters supporting him according to the second poll. The other candidates are not terribly behind, and might still be able to snatch the election last minute through intelligent tactics. Keep a look out.