Monday, November 7, 2016 by The Tufts Daily

BATTLEGROUND STATES

Democratic strategist, Tufts professor Simon Rosenberg talks career, the election, his return to Tufts see FEATURES / PAGE 3

The Daily’s guide, Electoral map for Election Day

Seven swinging senate seats that may tip the balance see ELECTION 2016 / PAGE 9

SEE ELECTION 2016 / BACK 6

THE

INDEPENDENT

STUDENT

N E W S PA P E R

TUFTS

UNIVERSITY

E S T. 1 9 8 0

T HE T UFTS DAILY

VOLUME LXXII, NUMBER 41

tuftsdaily.com

Monday, November 7, 2016

MEDFORD/SOMERVILLE, MASS.

CIVIC hosts debate between Tufts Democrats and Republicans by Seohyun Shim Contributing Writer

Approximately 100 students gathered to watch two Tufts Republicans and two Tufts Democrats argue on behalf of the opposing side’s party platform in Tufts CIVIC’s “The Last Debate” on Nov. 4 at 7 p.m. in the ASEAN Auditorium. First-years Robert Whitehead and Bennett Brain of Tufts Republicans faced off against Tufts Democrats sophomore Nesi Altaras and senior Ben Kaplan. The debate, which was co-sponsored by the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life, was moderated by CIVIC curriculum director Gabriella Roncone and CIVIC member Zach Merchant, a senior. The debate was divided into four sections: domestic policy, foreign policy, audience questions and a final section addressing the question, “After spending two hours arguing for your usual opponent’s side, what have you learned from this exercise? Anything surprising?” Questions were put together by the Tufts CIVIC executive board and finalized by the moderators after background research into each topic, Roncone, a sophomore, said. CIVIC co-leader Matthew Felsenfeld said that the group’s objective in the debate was to educate the campus a little more about both parties’ platforms and policy agendas, which presidential candidates did not fully cover in the televised debates. “We aim to bring the left, the right, anyone from the political spectrum together to have a meaningful, productive political conversation about current political issues,” Felsenfeld, a senior, said. “It

was our feeling that candidates have not really been talking about policy issues so we wanted Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans to actually have that conversation in an open forum.” Whitehead said he was pleased with the result of the debate and would like to see more discussions of the sort on campus. “I learned from this debate that it is very nice to actually have a serious debate with people across the aisle and once you … remove the context of an acrimonious and very decisive election, you have a much higher chance of having a more productive and substantive discussion,” he said. “CIVIC told us we are debating other party’s platform, not the candidate, so I read the Democratic platform [and now] I know where they are coming from.” However, Whitehead said he wished that Tufts Democrats had represented segments of the Republican Party that are not fully endorsing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. “[Tufts Democrats] did a good job in representing the Trump wing of the party, which is the largest but is not [a] majority of the view,” he said. “[The Republican] platform did change in response to that but it is a diverse party.” Tufts Democrats debaters agreed that the debate was fun and informative, but they had a different opinion on the Republican Party’s platform and to what extent Trump represents the GOP. “Other Republican candidates before were good Americans who wanted the best for our country in their minds, but this is not the case for Trump,” Kaplan said. “What [the] Republican Party has become now is a party

SEOHYUN SHIM / THE TUFTS DAILY

The Tufts Republicans debaters, first-years Robert Whitehead and Bennett Brain, answer questions from the audience after Tufts CIVIC’s “The Last Debate” event in the ASEAN Auditorium. of Trump, and his ideas have changed the Republican Party’s platform.” Both the Tufts Democrats and the Tufts Republicans agreed that the political plurality in the United States was not fully covered in major debates and many independent voices are lost during the election cycle. However, Kaplan believed that in the end there are two major options and voters should make “strategic choices” in order to make their voices heard most effectively. Whitehead, a registered Libertarian, was disappointed that the debate did not include third-party voices. “[The debate did] not cover two fairly significant chunks of people, the Green Party and the Libertarian Party, which is tragic, but it is

more because Tufts itself does not have clubs for those parties,” he said. Eva Kahan, a sophomore in the debate audience, said she thought the side-switching aspect of the debate added interest but made it more difficult for the speakers to accurately portray the other side’s point of view. “I was wondering, is there a way to make sure [debaters] are really invested in accurately portraying the other side and understanding the other side?” she said. “I feel like that maybe requires appealing to people’s own beliefs and addressing them directly than just putting them as play actors, but it still was an awesome idea and something we need more on campus.”

Massachusetts, Somerville ballot initiatives to look out for tomorrow Massachusetts voters will have the opportunity to vote on four ballot measures on Election Day this Tuesday. Somerville residents will have an additional fifth question on their ballots concerning a tax hike to fund a new high school. Questions on the Massachusetts ballot range from a new slots parlor to farm animal living conditions. Read up on your options and be ready for the polls.

Question 1 Massachusetts Ballot Question 1 involves the creation of another casino gambling establishment in the Commonwealth. According to a voter information guide published by Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Francis Galvin, passing Question 1 would allow the Massachusetts Gaming Commission to provide an additional Category 2 license, allowing for the creation of a site with 1,250 or fewer slot games and no table games. Currently, only one slots parlor is allowed in the state, and that license was already awarded to the Plainridge Park Casino, according to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s website. The Commission could grant the license to establishments that are located on land that is least four acres in area and no more than 1,500 feet from a race track. The track must be physically suitable for horse racing, a highway or railroad track cannot divide the track and site and horse racing must have occurred at the track. According to the “Yes to 1” campaign website’s homepage, passing Question 1 would result in more than $80 million per year in revenue to Massachusetts, $12 million per year to Massachusetts horse racing, thousands of new jobs for citizens of Massachusetts and an additional $5 million in revenue to the host city. Celeste Myers, chair of the Committee for Responsible and Sustainable Economic Development, a grassroots ballot question committee of Massachusetts anti-casino activist volunteers, argued against the initiative by saying that the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has made many initial promises about casino developments, some of which are thus far failing to achieve their full potential. Myers said passing Question 1 would also allow an outsider to impact Massachusetts gaming legislation. “It’s a … huge negative precedent for folks if they think that they can come in from … outside of the country, and buy off our civic engagement process,” she said. — by Gil Jacobson Continued on page 2

Please recycle this newspaper

Sunny 50 / 36

/thetuftsdaily

For breaking news, our content archive and exclusive content, visit tuftsdaily.com @tuftsdaily

tuftsdaily

NEWS............................................1 FEATURES.................................3 ARTS & LIVING.......................5

ELECTION.................................6 OPINION...................................12 SPORTS............................ BACK

THE TUFTS DAILY | News | Monday, November 7, 2016

tuftsdaily.com

State, city issues put to be put to the test on Election Day Question 2 Question 2 will present voters with the opportunity to decide whether to expand the charter school system in Massachusetts. If the measure passes, the state’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) will be able to license 12 new charter schools or expansions of existing charter schools per year, according to the proposed law. This year, there are 69 Commonwealth charter schools in operation, according to a DESE fact sheet. If passed, Question 2 would lift the current cap of 72 Commonwealth charter schools, and give preference to new charter schools in areas with low-performing school districts. Charter schools are operated independently, but are publicly-funded from the budgets of school districts, overseen by DESE and required to admit all students, according to a DESE report. Proponents of Question 2, led by the organization Great Schools Massachusetts, say that many charter schools have been successful. They point out that, according to standardized test data, minority and low-income charter school students perform better on average than their public school peers. Great Schools also argues that the state should expand charter schools to accommodate the families on charter school waiting lists, who currently number above 37,000 according to DESE. “[Charter schools] offer longer school days and more individual attention, and have a proven record of closing the achievement gap for kids trapped in failing school districts,” AnneMarie O’Connor Little from Great Schools wrote in the state’s Information for Voters guide. Opponents of the ballot question, led by Save our Public Schools, caution that charter schools take funding from struggling school districts. They also contend that their success varies and that they serve fewer high-need students. Massachusetts Teachers Association President Barbara Madeloni argued that because charter schools are more selective, standardized testing should not be the only measure of a school’s success. “It is essential that we stop labeling schools based on test scores and start talking about the resources available for the range of experiences we want available to our young people,” Madeloni told the Daily in an email. — by Joe Walsh

Question 3 A “yes” vote on Question 3, which pertains to conditions for farm animals, would prohibit any confinement of pigs, calves and hens that prevents them from standing up, lying down, fully extending limbs or turning around freely. A “no” vote would mean no change in current laws about the keeping of farm animals. The law would also prevent business owners in Massachusetts from selling eggs, veal or pork if they knew that the animal which produced these products was raised in a manner that was not allowed by this law, even if the animals were raised outside of Massachusetts. The law would exempt sales of prepared foods that could combine veal or pork with other products, such as sandwiches or pizzas, for example. “The proposed law’s confinement prohibitions would not apply during transportation; state and county fair exhibitions; 4-H programs; slaughter in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; medical research; veterinary exams, testing, treatment and operation,” the Massachusetts Information for Voters 2016 Ballot Questions pamphlet reads. Stephanie Harris, campaign director of Citizens for Farm Animal Protection, argued that a “yes” vote would guard against animal cruelty in Massachusetts by prohibiting inhumanely small spaces for animals and unsafe products on the Massachusetts market. The argument against Question 3, penned by William Bell of the New England Brown Egg Council, focuses on limited choice for consumers and the possibility of higher food prices. Bell also argued that the process of making animal containment policies more humane has been progressing on its own. “The veal industry plans to be completely phased out of veal crates by the end of 2017. One hundred and seventy five food suppliers have already pledged to switch to cage-free eggs. Others will follow,” he wrote in the pamphlet. Because the law would not take effect until Jan. 1, 2022, the fiscal consequences of the proposed measure are unknown at this time. — by Melissa Kain

Question 4 With Ballot Question 4, Massachusetts voters will decide on the legalization, regulation and taxation of marijuana. The proposed law would legalize marijuana use, possession, cultivation and distribution — with restrictions on amounts — for individuals older than 21. The proposed law would create a three-member Cannabis Control Commission, appointed by the state treasurer, which would be responsible for marijuana commercial licenses, as well as developing regulations for the cannabis industry on advertising standards, health and safety standards, inspections and license qualifications. Local oversight would also be emphasized, as the measure would allow cities and towns to place restrictions on the number, location and type of marijuana businesses. If legalized, retail sales of marijuana would be subject to state sales tax and an additional excise tax of 3.75 percent, and cities or towns will be given the ability to include a separate tax of up to 2 percent. Economic benefits from the proposed measure would include revenues from the state excise tax, license application fees and penalties for violations of the law. These revenues would be compiled in a Marijuana Regulation Fund and used for administration of the proposed law. Property owners would be able to prohibit marijuana use, sale or production. The one exception, according to the voters’ guide distributed to Massachusetts voters by the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Elections Division, would be that landlords would be unable to prohibit tenants’ consumption of marijuana through means other than smoking. Supporters argue that the initiative replaces an unregulated market controlled by drug dealers with a state-controlled and regulated one. “Passing this measure will allow local law enforcement to shift resources and focus to serious and violent crimes,” Will Luzier of the Yes on 4 campaign wrote in the voter’s guide. The opposition argues that the ballot measure would increase overall drug use, especially in light of the current opioid epidemic. “[Ballot Question 4 would create] a billion-dollar commercial marijuana industry that, just like Big Tobacco, would make millions on the backs of our communities, compromise health and safety, and harm kids,” State Representative Hannah Kane wrote in the guide. — by Zachary Hertz

Question 5 Somerville voters will face a fifth ballot question on Election Day that would authorize a citywide tax hike to help fund a new high school. On Election Day, voters will be asked whether or not to allow the city to temporarily raise taxes more than it is typically allowed to, as restricted by Proposition 2 ½. The additional municipal tax revenue would be earmarked solely for the new high school project. According to the City of Somerville’s website, Somerville High School (SHS) is in danger of losing its accreditation due to the condition of the building. Concerns range from energy use and structural issues — parts of the building are well over 100 years old — to a lack of modern classroom equipment, according to the website. The website also says that if the high school were to lose its accreditation, students applying to colleges and searching for jobs would be negatively affected. A 15-person committee that includes Mayor Joseph Curtatone, Superintendent Mary Skipper and Alderman-At-Large Mary Jo Rossetti determined that a combination of renovation and new additions would be the most feasible and cost-effective option. The new high school design is projected to cost $256 million, according to the website. The city would shoulder just over half of this amount, with the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) chipping in $120 million. Somerville would have to pay almost as hefty a sum if it opted to renovate the school instead of building a new one because it wouldn’t receive any funding from the state in that case. “There needs to be a plan to fix the high school’s problems by the 2020 reaccreditation and this is the most cost-effective way to do that. There just really isn’t an alternative,” Gregory Maynard, campaign manager for the Yes on Question 5 Campaign, said. But taxpayers will see a sizable rise in their bills if Question 5 passes. Increases would be minimal for the first few years, but by 2027 a two-family home could see a tax hike of up to $349. Many residents have expressed concerns over the high price tag and questioned whether the city could spend less on the project. — by Reena Karasin GRAPHICS BY PETER LAM / THE TUFTS DAILY

Monday, November 7, 2016

Features

Prof. Simon Rosenberg on career, the Democratic Party’s past and future battles

3 tuftsdaily.com

Rainbow House 2016 On Queer

by Fina Short

Contributing Writer

“If the polls are right and Hillary Clinton wins on Nov. 8, Democrats will have won more votes in six of the past seven presidential elections,” Simon Rosenberg (LA ’85) wrote in an Oct. 20 U.S. News opinion column. While the polls have fluctuated more significantly over the past few weeks, many Clinton supporters might believe that her success and the Democratic Party’s relative successes over the past few decades have been a happy accident. However, Rosenberg, a member of the Jonathan M. Tisch College for Civic Life Advisory Board and a current Tufts professor, has dedicated his life to helping the party get to where it is now. “It’s a historic achievement and I’ve spent my whole adult life trying to make that happen, starting with the [Bill] Clinton campaign,” Rosenberg said. “The Republicans are facing an existential threat — and this didn’t happen by accident.” Despite his dedication to Democratic politics, Rosenberg did not initially intend to go into the field. He graduated from Tufts in 1985 with a degree in English, immediately securing a job in network television with ABC News thanks to fellow Tufts graduate and former Executive Vice President of ABC News David Burke (A ’57). “Burke hired a graduating senior from Tufts every year to come work for him at ABC News … I think that if I hadn’t gotten that, I probably would have gone off to Cape Cod to write the great American novel,” Rosenberg said. “But I moved to New York and started a career in the news business.” Rosenberg maintains a significant media presence in the political world through his weekly column in U.S. News and frequent appearances on national television shows. He is also the president and founder of the New Democrat Network (NDN), a think tank supporting center-left Democratic candidates and policies. However, a great deal of his work is done behind the scenes. “A lot of what I do is not seen publicly,” he said. “I work with politicians and staff and do an enormous amount of work with the White House, Congress, USTR [United States Trade Representative] and the Department of Homeland Security.” Rosenberg worked on his first presidential campaign in the fall of 1987, joining other former Tufts classmates in support of the 1988 Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis. He returned to network television after the campaign ended, yet was drawn back into politics within a few years. “I joined the [Bill] Clinton campaign in New Hampshire in January of 1992 full-time and have been in politics for 24 years since,” Rosenberg said. During the Clinton presidential campaign, Rosenberg worked in the famous “war room,” an operation that popularized the rapid-response media monitoring tactics now common in modern campaigns. Rosenberg said his experience with the campaign inspired him to found the NDN.

I WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Simon Rosenberg (LA ‘85) gives a speech for his organization, NDN, on Nov. 14, 2005. “I believed that … we needed to invest in a new generation of political leaders who were more grounded in the sort of modern arguments that the Bill Clinton Democrats were making,” Rosenberg said. “In its original form, the New Democrat Network was a PAC that invested in hundreds of emerging political leaders all around the country … we were an ideological PAC.” In 2005, Rosenberg ran for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. While he lost the bid to former Vermont governor Howard Dean, Rosenberg said that at his final debate for the campaign, a group of students from Tufts Democrats showed up to support him, knowing he was an alum. “There were six debates that were nationally televised during the chair’s race,” Rosenberg said. “The last one was in New York City, and 20 college Democrats from Tufts drove all night and came down and surprised me.” This surprise appearance inspired him to find his way back to Tufts. He smiled as he reflected on the support Tufts students offered him at that debate. “I had the largest cheering section of any of the candidates,” he said. “It was a very gratifying moment. So those students got me reengaged in campus.” Today, Rosenberg teaches a course for Tufts undergraduates titled “Topics in American Politics: Changing America, Changing Politics,” a political science class cosponsored by the Tisch College for Civic Life. He said the course focuses heavily on writing, requiring students to submit a short 300-word essay every week. “A lot of what I did in the beginning was trying to explain to people that in the real world, you have to write short,” Rosenberg said. “You can’t use big words. You have to have a title.” He explained that his class attempts to close the gap between students’ academic experience and the political world, to push away from academic English and toward “real-world” writing. “The truth is, politics is spoken English,” Rosenberg said. “At the end of the day, the unit of our business is the politician making a pitch to the voter.” He expressed pride in his students’ work so far, saying he has been impressed with the clarity of their writing.

“I tell everybody who thinks that writing is on the decline in the United States, ‘Not based on the students I see here,’” Rosenberg said. “It’s one of the reasons why getting a weekly essay has not been a bummer. It’s something I look forward to.” Having witnessed Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign from the perspective of the “war room,” Rosenberg has seen significant changes in the way presidential campaigns were run then versus now. “They’re bigger,” he said. “Hillary’s enterprise will raise and spend over a billion dollars this cycle. But when you have more money, it means that you can touch more voters … So the good news is that I think the additional money is allowing more people into the campaign.” Rosenberg elaborated, saying that while the increase of money in politics may allow for more voter contact, fewer states today are actively engaged in the presidential campaign than have been in the past. There are fewer undecided voters, he said, and therefore fewer efforts to sway voters. “In the 1992 campaign there were 31 targeted states, and now there’s you know, 13, 14,” he said. “If you’ve lived in California, you haven’t voted in a competitive race for the Senate, the president or the governorship since the 1980s … You’re not actually giving your consent to the political system.” Nevertheless, Rosenberg expressed an overwhelming optimism for the future of American politics and said he felt fulfilled in the work he has done to promote the Democratic Party. “There are several hundred of us that have spent a generation trying to create a more effective center-left in the United States. I look back at this and say [that] I think I’ve been a major part of this, and I’m very proud of the work we’ve done,” Rosenberg said. He did not hesitate to express confidence in the ability of millennials to carry on this legacy. “This country is going to be in good hands with you guys,” Rosenberg said. “The millennial generation is a socially-minded, conscious, can-do generation, ‘yes we can’ kind of generation. Being here at Tufts is always very affirming to me.”

On Tinder

made a Tinder account during my senior year of high school. I never saw myself as the type of girl to use a dating app, but it was hard for me to meet other LGBTQ+ people without it. I always found that the high school dating pool for queer students can be small and unhealthy. I wound up deleting and re-making my Tinder account multiple times between my senior year back home and my sophomore year at college. I would find myself getting depressed if I got too absorbed in the app, but would miss it if I kept away from it for too long. In a way it was good for me: I met some really nice female-identifying and genderqueer people on Tinder, and our conversations were reliably good. When I match with a female-spectrum Tinder user, the conversation usually starts with some greetings, questions about majors, a few funny jokes or discoveries of mutual friends. It is usually a meaningful and validating conversation. About a month ago, I decided to alter my account so it showed me both male-spectrum and female-spectrum users in my area. I did it on a whim; I wanted to explore a new side of my identity. I never expected the differences between guys and gals on Tinder to be so striking. I have found that some cisgender, heterosexual men on Tinder can be pretty icky. When I flipped that switch on my Tinder settings page, the whole dynamic of the app changed. The guys I saw there almost invariably started conversation by commenting on my appearance, and if I responded (or even if I didn’t), they would usually send a thinly-veiled request to have-some-intercourse-soon-pleaseand-thank-you. Tinder became a point of stress for me. I felt obligated to respond to these guys when they messaged me, but I never liked the direction our conversations went. They were explicitly sexual in a way that made me uncomfortable. It’s not that I’m not interested in dating someone who identifies as male: it’s that the male spectrum people who I saw on Tinder frequently made me feel like an object. An object who deserves some very poorly-crafted pick up lines and an object who is super excited to strip off her panties the second she sees a picture of a cis boy standing next to [insert celebrity name here]. I decided that these new Tinder interactions were not for me. I deleted my Tinder account again last week. Maybe I will reboot my Tinder someday, maybe I will not. For now, I am happy focusing on the many people I know and love in real life. This column was written by an anonymous resident of the Rainbow House. Have a suggestion for an article, a question or a topic you’d like them to cover? Email them at rhouse@gmail.com.

THE TUFTS DAILY | ADVERTISEMENT | Monday, November 7, 2016

T HE T UFTS D AILY Arin Kerstein Editor-in-Chief

EDITORIAL

Sophie Lehrenbaum Jake Taber Managing Editors Evan Sayles Associate Editor Kathleen Schmidt Executive News Editor Gil Jacobson News Editors Melissa Kain Robert Katz Liam Knox Catherine Perloff Jei-Jei Tan Hannah Uebele Joe Walsh Juliana Furgala Assistant News Editors Jesse Najarro Danny Nelson

Miranda Willson Executive Features Editor Constantinos Angelakis Features Editors Nina Joung Becca Leibowitz Justin Krakoff Executive Arts Editor John Gallagher Arts Editors Eran Sabaner Isaac Brown Assistant Arts Editors Jocelyn Contreras Alison Epstein Elliot Storey Emma Henderson Executive Op-Ed Editor Shannon Geary Cartoonists Stephen Dennison Allie Merola Miranda Chavez Editorialists Frances DeFreitas Eriko Koide Anita Ramaswamy Noah Weinflash Phillip Goldberg Executive Sports Editor Yuan Jun Chee Sports Editors Maddie Payne Eddie Samuels Maclyn Senear Josh Slavin Brad Schussel Assistant Sports Editor Noah Smith Max Lalanne Mia Lambert Caroline Ambros Ray Bernoff Scott Fitchen Jean Gonzalez Kevin Ho Thaw Htet Lilia Kang Sitara Rao Evan Sayles Zachary Sebek Alexis Serino Seohyun Shim Angelie Xiong Ezgi Yazici

Executive Photo Editor Photo Administrator Picture Tufts Editor Staff Photographers

PRODUCTION David Westby Production Director Allie Merola Executive Layout Editors Sebastian Torrente Lilia Aronoff-Aspatur Layout Editors Jewel Castle Brianna Mignano Emily Sharp Astrid Weng Ezgi Yazici Alice Yoon Petrina Chan Creative Director Allie Merola Executive Graphics Editor Petrina Chan Graphics Editors Peter Lam JSebastian Torrente

Zach Hertz Executive Copy Editors Jei-Jei Tan Norrie Beach Copy Editors Arthur Beckel Caroline Bollinger Alison Epstein Gil Jacobson Melissa Kain Reena Kerasin Bibi Lichauco Kathleen Martensen Netai Schwartz Nihaal Shah Arielle Sigel Liora Silkes Dan Strauss

Maxwell Bernstein Executive Tech Manager Nitesh Gupta Online Editor Mia Lambert Social Media Editor

BUSINESS Josh Morris Executive Business Director Eleanor Harvey Ad Manager

The Tufts Daily wants to hear from you!

Have a problem with our coverage? Upset about something happening at Tufts or in the community? The Daily welcomes all thoughts, opinions and complaints from all readers. Have your voice heard! Send op-ed submissions, 800-1200 words, to tuftsdailyoped@gmail.com.

tuftsdaily.com

Monday, November 7, 2016

ARTS&LIVING MOVIE REVIEW

‘Hacksaw Ridge’ is brutal, effective by Elliot Storey

sequence in “Full Metal Jacket” (1987), and while Vaughn can’t muster R. Lee Ermey’s vulgar fury, he acquits himself well. It is evident from “Hacksaw Ridge,” Mel Howell, Doss’ fellow privates and the Gibson’s first film as a director since officer corps of the company all believe “Apocalypto” (2006), that the director’s filmDoss is simply a coward, and they do making ability has not waned in the intertheir best to send him packing by teasing, vening decade. hazing and beating him, but he perseThe new film is a chronicle of realveres and even a court-martial can’t deter life World War II conscientious objector him. These scenes, while well-paced Desmond T. Doss (Andrew Garfield), a individually, become cumbersome taken Seventh-day Adventist who refused to carry together. Well before Doss, incarcerata weapon when he was drafted into the war. ed and awaiting court-martial, says to Doss was awarded the Medal of Honor for Dorothy, “I feel that my values are under his actions at the Battle of Okinawa, and attack and I don’t why,” the parallels to any elaboration on his heroics is better left contemporary Christians’ perceptions of to Gibson. persecution are clear. Gibson does not First and foremost, this is a film about the traffic in subtlety, and his bludgeoning courage of one’s convictions and the willingapproach here, though well-crafted and ness to stand up for one’s religious beliefs, acted, is still a bludgeon. and Doss’ refusal to compromise his morals However, once Doss leaves Virginia makes up the first half of the film. behind and arrives at Okinawa, that same It begins in Doss’ hometown of style becomes brutally effective. Doss and Lynchburg, Va., where his refusal to bear his comrades are tasked with taking the titular ridge, a sheer seaside cliff relentlessly defended by the Japanese. The Americans have been pushed back from the ridge several times, and Doss’ company is merely the latest mass of bodies to be sent into the meat grinder. The initial battle sequence very nearly defies description. The Motion Picture Association of America has rated it R for “intense prolonged realistically graphic sequences of war violence including grisly bloody images.” This is a dramatic understatement. The opening D-Day sequence in “Saving Private Ryan” (1998), long considered the ultimate unflinching depiction of the hell of war, pales in comparison to what is on display here. That the gore never feels gratuitous is a testament to Gibson’s skill. Unlike the slick gunplay of “John Wick” (2014) or the gleeful badassery of “Mad Max: Fury Road” (2015), there is no “cool” factor involved. It’s clear that Gibson wanted to capture every terrifying aspect of not only the battle, but also its aftermath. The American soldiers are confronted both by Japanese defenders and the corpses of the fallen, rotting and infested by pests and vermin. The violence is accurate and unabbreviated, and the results are shocking, conveying both the utter horror of battle and illuminating Doss’ bravery in repeatedly risking life and limb to aid his men. The only excess comes in Gibson’s inability to resist making Christlike comparisons, including a shot of Doss washing away the grime of war that evokes Jesus’ baptism, and an extended shot of Doss suspended in the air, a blunt-force version of the Ascension. Despite its lack of nuance, Gibson’s comeback film is excellent and well worth it for those who identify with its religious themes and for those able to set aside the baggage of COURTESY LIONSGATE Mel Gibson's new film, "Hacksaw Ridge," stars Andrew Garfield and premiered on Nov. 4. Gibson’s past. Assistant Arts Editor

arms is cemented and where he meets his fiancée, nurse Dorothy Schutte (Teresa Palmer). Garfield is effective in these early scenes, his accent convincing and earnest grin charming both Dorothy and the audience. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Doss feels compelled to serve, later saying that when the Japanese attacked, “I took it personal.” His father Tom Doss, masterfully portrayed by Hugo Weaving, is furious. A World War I veteran, the elder Doss spends most of his time drinking and grieving for his fallen friends, wracked with survivor’s guilt and terrified that his son will become another gravestone for him to mourn. But as will become increasingly clear, Doss will not relent on anyone else’s account. Despite his wishes to serve as a medic, Doss is assigned to a rifle company and put under the charge of Sergeant Howell (Vince Vaughn). Writers Andrew Knight and Robert Schenkkan apparently couldn’t resist styling Doss’ boot camp experience after the iconic

5 tuftsdaily.com

Nikki Margaretos Is This Thing On?

Making music great again

he opening line of Buffalo Springfield’s “For What It’s Worth,” (1967), in which he sings “There’s something happening here / But what it is ain’t exactly clear,” is something you’ve probably said to yourself (many times) in the past year with regard to the 2016 presidential election. Let’s get right into it. Music is a creative outlet for artists and a source of entertainment for listeners. But more importantly, though perhaps often forgotten, it’s a powerful tool for social change. Of course, I’ve only been alive for two decades and can’t speak to the experiences of growing up among the political movements of the 20th century, but I can point to the musical legacies. To be able to discuss the contributions of, say, Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young in my 20th-century history classes was, honestly, pretty inspiring. This begs the question: what will our textbooks include in the musical narrative from today? Please note, this column is only 500 words and should only serve as a conversation starter on the topic. On first glance, I would struggle to call popular music today “politically charged.” Now, I’m not ignoring the works of Beyoncé, Kanye, Kendrick and countless others, but I’m interested in how much politics has permeated the masses. When I look to music broadcasted on the radio, I hear songs with lighter themes. Why might that be? Are we more apathetic about current events? Do artists feel that music with thematic messages wouldn’t yield high success? A friend showed me a project called “30 Days, 30 Songs,” which describes itself as “written and recorded by artists for a Trump-Free America.” The artists came together to speak out against the rhetoric of the Trump campaign. I am a little disappointed that I discovered this only two days before election day, but regardless, I recommend checking it out. In looking at pop music, the prevailing themes appear to be more about accepting our shortcomings and breaking social norms. I chose to look at traditional pop because, if the purpose is to spread ideas using music as a vehicle, this is the music that has the highest impact on a large audience. Even Mike Posner’s “I Took A Pill In Ibiza,” (2016) which bangs like any other EDM song, actually breaks from its genre, which stereotypically promotes drinking, drug use and partying. While I admit I am not a fan of Meghan Trainor’s music, I have to hand it to her with her latest hit, “NO” (2016), which berates the concept of men sleazily picking up women. In regard to mental health, 21 Pilots does a nice job of illustrating the stressors of conforming to today’s society. But, again, would I say that music today is politically charged? Some songs are without a doubt. Yet on a whole, I think that the distributive influence of music could and should be harnessed further. Nikki Margaretos is a junior double-majoring in economics and international relations. Nikki can be reached at nikoletta. margaretos@tufts.edu.

THE TUFTS DAILY | ELECTION 2016 | Monday, November 7, 2016

tuftsdaily.com

General Election 2016: The Electoral Map As of Nov. 7, Donald Trump is projected to win 157 electoral votes, with 40 electoral votes leaning towards him. Hillary Clinton is projected to win 182 electoral votes, with 87 electoralvotes leaning towards her. Only 72 electoral votes are considered pure "toss-ups." For more detailed coverage on states to watch, see page 8. â€”Justin Krakoff

Colorado (9)

RCP Polling Average: 40.4% Trump, 43.3% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: D+1

Nevada (6)

RCP Polling Average: 46.0% Trump, 44.0% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: D+2

Arizona (11) SOURCES: REAL CLEAR POLITICS AND THE COOK POLITICAL REPORT

RCP Polling Average: 46.3% Trump, 42.3% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: R+7

Monday, November 7, 2016 | ELECTION 2016 | THE TUFTS DAILY

Iowa (6)

RCP Polling Average: 44.3% Trump, 41.3% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: D+1

Ohio (18)

State (Electoral College Votes)

RealClear Politics (RCP) Polling Averages: Median results of polls conducted throughout the election cycle Cook Partisan Voter Index (PVI): Measurement of how Democratic or Republican a state is compared to the nation as a whole Toss-up

RCP Polling Average: 46.3% Trump, 43.5% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: R+1

Likely Republican

Leans Republican

Leans Democratic

Likely Democratic

Pennsylvania (20) RCP Polling Average: 43.6% Trump, 46.0% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: D+1

New Hampshire (4) RCP Polling Average: 43.4% Trump, 41.8% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: D+1

Virginia (13)

RCP Polling Average: 47.4% Trump, 42.2% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: Even

North Carolina (15) RCP Polling Average: 47.3% Trump, 45.8% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: R+3

Georgia (16) Florida (29)

RCP Polling Average: 46.0% Trump, 47.0% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: R+2

RCP Polling Average: 48.4% Trump, 43.8% Clinton Cook 2014 PVI: R+6

GRAPHICS BY ALLIE MEROLA / THE TUFTS DAILY

THE TUFTS DAILY | ELECTION 2016 | Monday, November 7, 2016

tuftsdaily.com

States to watch in 2016 Iowa: A state that went twice for Obama, Iowa has undergone drastic change over the past eight years. With working class whites effectively fleeing the Democratic Party during the 2014 midterm elections, Trump is poised to outperform past Republican presidential nominees Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the state. Only a nationwide Clinton landslide will keep this in the Democratic column. Arizona: Democrats have only won Arizona once since 1948, with Bill Clinton eking out a surprise during his re-election campaign in 1996. A rapidly growing Hispanic population suggests that a purple Arizona may finally be at hand, though Trump will not concede the state so easily. While polling has shown a tight race for months, the Clinton campaign has only made a serious play for the state in the last two weeks, with visits from Clinton herself and high-profile surrogates like Michelle Obama. Georgia: Like Arizona, Georgia is a state that Democrats have dreamt of turning purple, thanks in large part to its diverse African American and Hispanic populations. Even though Obama unsuccessfully attempted to compete here in 2008, the reality of winning Georgia for the first time since 1992 has become tangible for Democrats. While the race has tightened nationally, recent polls have showed this state to be practically deadlocked, not surprising given the state’s similar voting pattern to North Carolina, another close battleground this year. If Clinton can hit around the 30 percent of the white vote as she has in other southern states, this competition may become a reality. Ohio: The old saying goes, “As Ohio goes, so goes the nation.” The nation’s most durable bellwether, predicting the winner of every single presidential election since 1964, has given an edge to Trump this year, though Clinton has refused to concede the Buckeye State. No Republican has ever won the White House without winning Ohio, and if Clinton can block him here, Trump’s path to 270 narrows significantly. Nevada: Notoriously tough to poll due to its booming Hispanic population, Nevada has emerged as a true swing state after voting twice for Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, respectively. The strength of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) Democratic turnout machine in Nevada, powered by Hispanics and Asian Americans, has kept the state competitive, despite the fact that its demographics inherently appeal to Trump with a higher rate of non-college educated whites (41.9 percent) compared to the rest of the United States (41.6 percent). Either this will be another case of Democrats outperforming their poll numbers as they have done consistently since 2008 or Trump will pull through from a neck-and-neck race. Florida: The state that handed George W. Bush the White House is long gone; in its place, a more diverse Florida has emerged. Florida's electorate consists of approximately 38 percent eligible non-white voters, in part due to the state’s growing I-4 corridor. Florida’s 29 electoral votes are critical to either candidate’s chance of victory, and polls have shown a neck-and-neck race between the candidates as a result of varying levels of support from Cuban American and white voters. North Carolina: This is, undoubtedly, the mother of all battlegrounds this year. As the site of competitive contests across the presidential, senatorial and gubernatorial levels, North Carolina has cemented its status as a true swing state and is currently ground zero for the ongoing debate about transgender rights in the country. If Clinton can successfully replicate Obama’s stunning 2008 win, Trump’s path to the White House will be all but blocked. New Hampshire: Despite New Hampshire only having gone red once in the past six elections, the state has become one of this year’s most competitive battlegrounds, because the state is highly receptive to changes in the national mood. The state also has another trio of competitive races, like North Carolina. Be sure to look here for any signs of a Trump comeback on Tuesday night as the state’s overwhelmingly white population (about 93 percent) has proven to be favorable ground for him in the past. Pennsylvania: Simply put, Trump desperately needed to make the Keystone State competitive in order to overcome his weakness in other traditional swing states such as Colorado and Virginia. However, he has not led in a major public poll since July, cementing the cold hard truth that the state is probably out of reach for him. With the state having voted Democratic since 1992, Pennsylvania will continue to be a siren call for most Republican candidates on the presidential level after Trump failed to move the needle with his coalition built around white-working class voters. Virginia: Prior to 2008, Virginia had been one of the most reliable Republican states in the country, yet the Obama campaign activated a coalition centered upon African Americans and educated white voters, which dramatically altered the state’s politics. Romney competed hard here in 2012, while the Trump campaign has struggled to even seem competitive as Clinton maintains a large lead in the state. Colorado: Colorado is another swing state in which Trump has struggled to gain traction in, which left Clinton confident enough to pull advertisements until just last week. Yet the state was the tipping point in 2008 and 2012; its nine electoral votes pushed President Obama over the mark to 270. This former red state remains competitive, but Democrats recently surpassed Republicans in voter registration for the first time in decades, suggesting Colorado may remain out of reach for Trump. —Justin Krakoff

Monday, November 7, 2016 | ELECTION 2016 | THE TUFTS DAILY

Battle for the Senate: Seven seats to follow With the battle for the upper chamber coming down to the wire, there are seven Senate seats that will decide which party assumes control. Toss-up

Likely Republican

Leans Republican

No race

Leans Democratic

Likely Democratic

3. GRAPHICS BY ALLIE MEROLA / THE TUFTS DAILY

1. North Carolina: When Democrats failed to land a major recruit to challenge Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), Deborah Ross was originally written off by many political operatives due to her low name recognition and her record that largely skews to the left of North Carolina’s general political views. However, her ability to effectively capitalize on Burr’s weaknesses and out-fundraise him have made this race closer than anyone expected. Considering the state’s fierce presidential and gubernatorial contests, this race is sure to also come down to the wire, with recent polls showing the race drawn to a practical tie. 2. Indiana: Former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) was once thought to be a shoe-in as he sought to reclaim his old Senate seat. Now, nearly four months later, Bayh appears to be in serious trouble. Rep. Todd Young (R-IN) has run a brutal campaign against him, and a previous Democratic lock has become one of the closest races in the battle for the Senate, with Young even pulling into the lead as the contest heads into its final days. 3. Missouri: A year ago, this race was not on on anyone's radar, as Democrats saw more competitive pickup opportunities in Florida and Ohio. With incumbents in both races opening clear leads, Democratic leaders made the decision to re-allocate resources into Army veteran Democrat Jason Kander’s campaign against incumbent Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO). Kander arguably had the best ad of the cycle as he assembled a rifle blindfolded in response to Blunt’s attacks on his gun control record, cementing his status as a rising star within the Democratic Party. 4. New Hampshire: Current Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan and incumbent Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) are currently two of New Hampshire’s biggest political icons, making the race for this Senate seat one of the most contested in the country. While Ayotte has struggled to distance herself from Trump in previous months, her numbers have appeared to stabilize, though Hassan has led in certain polls. Many agree that the race could ultimately come down to a coin toss and the margin of victory in the presidential race. 5. Nevada: Republicans had one of their best pickup chances of the cycle with the retirement of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and their nomination of Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV). An active Army Reservist, Heck stood best to capitalize on the overall discontent with Reid, whose popularity remains underwater, and the general lacklusterness of former Democratic Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto. Ultimately, Heck failed to address the problem Trump’s candidacy poised to his candidacy with a significant Hispanic electorate and the potency of Reid’s much-vaunted turnout machine, suggesting this race leans more Democratic than most polls predict. 6. Pennsylvania: Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) was elected during the Tea Party Wave of 2010 in a state that has consistently voted Democratic since 1980. Democratic challenger Katie McGinty was the preferred choice of the party over failed candidate Joe Sestak during the primary, and while not the strongest recruit, McGinty has led in 11 out of the last 12 polls. Unless Trump improves his overall position in the state, Toomey faces the difficult task of garnering split ticket votes in a race that has largely moved in sync with the presidential contest. 7. Wisconsin: Months ago, former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) seemed poised to easily reclaim his old Senate seat from incumbent Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), who ousted Feingold in the Tea Party Wave of 2010. However, the polls have tightened at an alarming rate in Wisconsin, moving this once Democratic pickup into toss-up territory. While Feingold retains the narrowest of leads, it is now not inconceivable that Johnson may somehow survive to see re-election. —Justin Krakoff

THE TUFTS DAILY | ADVERTISEMENT | Monday, November 7, 2016

1/4

tuftsdaily.com

1/8

1/2 IMAGe

Monday, November 7, 2016 | ADVERTISEMENT | THE TUFTS DAILY

tuftsdaily.com

Tufts University Department of Drama and Dance Check out our Spring 2017 classes! Express yourself in film!

Evolve your passion for dance!

Film Directing: DR158-01, T Advanced Film Making: DR191-02, T Screenwriting I: DR77-01,T Screenwriting II: DR178-01, T

Venture into a performance class! Acting I: DR10, 4 sections, M/W & T/Th Physical Comedy/Clown: DR94-05, T/Th (consent) Acting II: DR12-01, T/Th Directing II: DR156-01, F Public Speaking: DR27-01 & 02, M/W Voice and Speech: DR28-01, M/W

Delve into theatre history & performance studies!

Ballet II: DNC13-01, M/W Ballet IV: DNC15-01, M/W Modern I: DNC21-01, T/Th Modern III: DNC23-01, T/Th Dance on Camera: DNC 77-01, T/Th Dance and the Hollywood Musical: DNC92-06, M/W Dance Movement & Creative Process: DNC71-01, M/W

Explore the globe! Kathak Dance Theater: DNC47-01, T/Th Afro-Haitian Dance: DNC92-07, T/Th Tai Ji Quan: DR94-04, M/W

Uncover your inner techie & designer!

Early Modern Theatre: DR3-01, T/Th Latino Theatre and Film: DR51-01, M/W Domestic Tragedy, Sexuality, Identity, Performance: DR254-01, T Foundations & Futures in Performance Studies: DR294-02, W

Lighting Design: DR18, M/W Stage Engineering: DR20, M Stage Management: DR25, M Set Design: DR125, W Makeup Design and Application: DR15, T

Spring classes are open for viewing in SIS on October 31 Registration - November 14-25

Questions about classes? Call 617-627-3524, M-F, 10-4 www.dramadance.tufts.edu

12 tuftsdaily.com

Opinion

Monday, November 7, 2016

OP-ED

AOII: Sisters still by Harper Hopkins

Inflection point (n.): 1. A point on a curve in which curvature switches from upwards to downwards, or vice versa; 2. A point in time where a narrative changes dramatically, often in response to external influences. At an inflection point in the graph of an equation, the equation’s derivative (the rate of change of the equation) reaches a maximum or a minimum. For a moment in time, as the derivative pauses in its climb or fall, everything hangs in the balance. At this point, if the equation is modelling a system, that system is often referred to as being unstable or volatile. The slightest disturbance can send the graph plunging or skyrocketing, producing an inflection point that changes the meaning of the graph forever. For Alpha Omicron Pi (AOII) Delta Chapter, that inflection point occurred on Sept. 16 when the question of whether Delta could extend a bid to a transgender woman was raised with the international organization of AOII. That woman was me. The answer was no. Delta, nevertheless, unanimously and anonymously voted to proceed with extending me a bid anyway. This is my background. This is my bias. The recent Daily article published on Friday, Nov. 4 tells a story of what happened thereafter; it speaks of latenight conference calls, fears of lawsuits and a group divided by fundamental issues of human rights. It speaks of sisters abandoning each other over ideological differences. It speaks of a president in exile explaining her reasons for leaving the organization. This

is one story. This is one narrative. What it does not speak of is the earnest efforts of sisters on both sides of the issue to address issues of systemic inequality and structural violence, and to make right where there has been wrong. It does not speak to the love that has been expressed by members (current and former) of AOII for their (current and former) sisters. Around the inflection point of Sept. 16, the future of Delta and its individual members did, in fact, hang in a delicate balance. One thing was clear to everyone: If AOII International chose to formally forbid Delta from extending a bid, Delta was prepared to disaffiliate, becoming a local sorority. The question on everyone’s mind was what to do in other cases. Every member agreed that AOII International had, in the past and present, displayed problematic behavior that could not be ignored. Some members felt that the best course of action was to stay in Delta, working for change from the inside. Others — like myself — felt that this was not productive, and that the only responsible choice was to stop financially supporting AOII International and work for change on a more local level. AOII Delta was, at this point, an unstable system. The disturbance that would decide the direction of departure from the inflection point was the arrival of AOII International’s Assistant Executive Director Kaya Miller. She came with a decision for us: She was to meet with each sister and uninitiated new member over a period of two days, and ask each to make a commitment either to self-suspend (permanently leave) from AOII or to stay.

The reaction to this announcement was not positive. Miller had been sent from AOII headquarters with apparently insufficient preparation, admitting at one point during a general all-member meeting that she was not aware of any of other grievances which AOII Delta held against AOII International except for the issue of initiating trans members. Over the two-day meeting period (as well as some in the days before and after), around 40 members of the chapter self-suspended. Would this number have been lower or higher had there not been such a hard line drawn at the two-day meetings? No one can be sure. Personally, I suspect that it would have been lower. Which brings us to the Daily’s article. I encourage the reader to take a moment, look back and reread this op-ed up to this point. Go ahead, I can wait. Done? Now, did you see any traces of enmity between those who stayed and those who left? I hope not. Were there disagreements in methodology? Yes. Were there personal relationships that swayed sisters’ decisions one way or another? Yes. I cannot speak for every sister. I think, however, that my feelings on these issues are similar to those of many of my friends, both in and out of Delta. The reasons I left were threefold: I did not feel comfortable financially supporting an institution that had displayed oppressive policies and behaviors in the past and present. Many of my friends, the same people for whom I had joined Delta in the first place, were leaving. I wanted to be with them. I did not feel that I, personally, could contribute significantly to creat-

ing lasting change inside the structure of AOII International. I decided instead to opt for more locally-based activism and advocacy, where I felt that I could have a larger impact. The sisters who stayed behind did so for equally valid reasons. Again, I cannot speak for them. However, to the best of my knowledge, not one sister who chose to stay did so feeling that AOII International was without fault. Not one felt that there was no room for improvement in the organization. Not one made anything less than an earnest personal commitment to endeavor to affect change from within, in the interest of making AOII a safer, more inclusive space for people of all identities. Similarly, the sisters who left were not cowards. Nor was our departure only an act of protest. We were individuals who left for individual reasons to pursue our individual solutions to the problems we perceived in our environment. We are not the opponents, opposites or enemies of the women who stayed in Delta. We are two separate groups with similar goals and differing ideas regarding the actualization of these goals. Most importantly: We are friends. We are allies. We are sisters. Editor’s note: If you would like to send your response or make an op-ed contribution to the Opinion section, please email us at tuftsdailyoped@ gmail.com. The Opinion section looks forward to hearing from you.

Harper Hopkins is a sophomore majoring in computer science. Harper can be reached at harperdhopkins@gmail.com.

OP-ED

Why your vote matters by Jamie Neikrie

There is a lot of pessimism surrounding this election, especially on Tufts’ campus. As young people, we are used to being promised grand schemes and sweeping ideals every four years. This rhetoric played a key role in the rise of Senator Bernie Sanders during this election cycle. However, for many — especially people of color and minorities — these promises can often fail to materialize. Let me be clear: I get why people don’t vote. They feel distanced from a system that too often fails to represent them, led by people who do not look like them, do not think like them and do not seem to have their best interests at heart. They view the gridlock and ineptitude that has gripped Washington for over a decade, and see very little in which they should invest hope. These are legitimate, but myopic views. Voting matters, and your vote counts. According to an April 2016 study by the Pew Research Center, nearly 70 million millennials, people between the ages 18 to 35, are eligible to vote in the 2016 election, a

voting bloc that has the potential to swing any election. The 2014 midterm election featured a voting rate of less than 20 percent for those between the ages of 18 and 29, according to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE). This number was the lowest figure for our demographic in the past 40 years, and a number that lags far behind more senior age groups. The percentage of young people who said they were registered to vote in 2014 was also the lowest in decades, at 46.7 percent. This means that we are effectively letting our elders make the decisions for us. If every college student in the country voted, politicians would be far more responsive to our demands and goals. Currently, with such a low voting rate, we have given them little reason to acknowledge our policy agendas. In addition, as Rock the Vote identified, “Sixty-one percent of millennials identify as White, while 17 percent are Hispanic, 15 percent are Black and 4 percent are Asian.” If millennials do not vote, then who else will represent the needs and aspirations of such a diverse constituency? Voting is the expression of political

opinion, and we are abnegating that responsibility. Another reason that people opt not to vote is that the policy decisions of Washington feel distant from their daily lives. This feeling is, in part, because we are on an island devoid of many of the responsibilities of life. But this will soon change. Within the next four years, Tufts students will begin to find jobs, rent their own houses, start families, begin paying for healthcare or start their own businesses. The decision that you make on Nov. 8 will play a pivotal role in every aspect of your life — if not now, then very soon. But it is important to remember that you are not just casting a vote in the presidential election on Election Day. On the ballot in Massachusetts are four ballot initiatives, each of which gives the residents of the Commonwealth, which includes many of us, the clearest path to directly creating legislation. These ballot questions will delve into key issues such as the expansion of state charter schools and the legalization of recreational marijuana. There is also a congressional race in our district. Across the country, state and local elections will have massive

ramifications on policy. No matter what state or town you vote in, there will be a critical question at stake on the ballot. I am not going to tell you who to vote for tomorrow. To me, the choice is clear. If you do not vote for either major party candidate, vote for a third-party candidate, or write in a name. The act of casting a vote is what is important. Voting is a right that generations of Americans struggled to win — a right still denied to many across the world today. It is a duty and a sign that you care about the future of your fellow Americans, if not your own. It is your voice, your expression. So, tomorrow, Nov. 8, go make your voice heard. Editor’s note: If you would like to send your response or make an op-ed contribution to the Opinion section, please email us at tuftsdailyoped@ gmail.com. The Opinion section looks forward to hearing from you.

Jamie is a junior majoring in political science. Jamie can be reached at benjamin. neikrie@tufts.edu.

Monday, November 7, 2016 | Opinion | THE TUFTS DAILY

Aren Torikian The Arena

I love (the Electoral) College

SHANNON GEARY

ne more day. One more day until America has its new president and “Saturday Night Live” loses its only funny material. We are nearly 20 months into a process that has cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but I still could not tell you who is going to win tomorrow. Right now, the numbers still favor Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton; she is ahead nationally by a slim margin of three points. After a few weeks of weakening poll numbers and “Carlos Danger,” poll numbers have started to stabilize. But remember that national numbers do not mean quite as much as state numbers, thanks to our Electoral College. To explain the purpose and origin of the Electoral College, I would need 500-550 pages instead of the 500-550 words I get. To keep it brief, candidates receive all of a given state’s electoral votes if they win the state’s popular vote. That’s right, winning in California by one vote means the candidate wins every single one of California’s 55 electoral votes (electoral votes increase as state population does). To win the presidency, a candidate needs a majority of electoral votes — 270 out of 538 to be exact. Yes, the popular vote loser does sometimes win in the Electoral College (@ GeorgeWBush). It’s a stupid system, but it’s kind of fun. It can also end in a tie, but we’ll cross that bridge when, and if, we get there. Coming into Election Day, it looks as if Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has the slimmer margin for error in competitive “swing” states. If we look at the states that are solidly leaning in Clinton’s direction, her current electoral vote count is 268. All she would have to do is pick off one more state to lock up the presidency. Trump needs to hold strong in states like Ohio and Iowa, but also win in competitive races in New Hampshire, North Carolina and Florida, among others. At the same time, Trump has pushed back against Clinton’s 268 electoral vote “firewall,” as the cool kids call it. Clinton is worried enough about Michigan that she was in Detroit this weekend before heading to Ohio to campaign (and presumably shoot around) with LeBron. Bernie Sanders was outperformed by Hillary in every poll in Michigan, but beat Clinton there this spring. Trump would strike a big blow if he could win it, too. If you have classes in the morning and don’t want to be up until the wee hours of the night, pay attention to these early states. If Trump is losing big in North Carolina or Florida, that will be a good indicator of his odds nationwide. If he flips Michigan or even Wisconsin, then it may be a long night. As I alluded to earlier, assuming polls are not completely off, the advantage is probably in Clinton’s favor. Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight (now you know where the name comes from) has it at almost two to one odds for Clinton. But (and I feel like I say this every week) this election has taught me not to assume anything. I would be remiss if I did not send one last plea to everybody registered at Tufts to vote tomorrow. Hopefully your ballot is a bit more diverse than mine, where six out of seven positions were uncontested.

Aren Torikian is a junior majoring in economics and international relations. Aren can be reached at Aren.Torikian@ tufts.edu.

76948

THE TUFTS DAILY | ADVERTISEMENT | Monday, November 7, 2016

tuftsdaily.com

GET TWICE AS MANY EGGS IN YOUR BASKET. 1

Low fees can mean higher returns for you. Start now at TIAA.org/results

INVESTING

ADVICE

BANKING

RETIREMENT

BUILT TO PERFORM. CREATED TO SERVE. 1

Our assumption of: $100K, with a 6% rate of return, over a 30-year time period, with fees at a constant (.52%), saves an investor $92,523.91 — versus paying fees at the mutual fund industry average (1.25%). This is a hypothetical illustration. These returns are for illustrative purposes only and do not reflect actual (product) performance, which will fluctuate. TIAA-CREF Individual & Institutional Services, LLC. TIAA-CREF products are subject to market and other risk factors. C32769

A TIAA__FALL PRINT_GET TWICE AS MANY EGGS_C__V_. C M Y B

Passionate about sports? Have a unique perspective on student athletics? Interested in covering the intersection of sports and the larger Tufts community? Write for us! Contact dailysports@gmail.com!

Monday, November 7, 2016 | Sports | THE TUFTS DAILY

Preston's 99-yard pick six seals game for Jumbos FOOTBALL

continued from back position and the defense held tough enough. To have them only come away with [a] field goal, [the] defense really held true and played a great game.” Despite this performance during the first half, Civetti said he remained confident his team would get back on track. “With as many seniors as we have and that much leadership, I wasn’t worried,” Civetti said. “I knew it would be a tough game; it always is.” From that point, the Jumbos approached the second half like a completely different team. The Mules managed a fourth field goal with 10:14 remaining in the third quarter, but did not score the rest of the game. Tufts bottled up the Colby run game that has been stagnant all season without senior running back Jabari HurdlePrice. The Jumbos held the Mules to just 48 yards on the ground. Stopping the run game also translated to the passing game, as Colby was forced into thirdand-long pass plays, which Tufts read easily. Colby converted on just three

of 15 third downs in the game and was often forced to punt, despite starting with a strong field position. “We came out of halftime and took care of what we needed to take care of,” Civetti said. “We got back to playing our football: attention to detail, running the football, being smart with the ball. Sometimes guys try to do more than they’re supposed to and it ends up hurting the team.” The Jumbos’ offense found its rhythm again with Brady racking up 26 carries in the game. He added two more scores to his stat-line on runs from one and seven yards out in the third and fourth quarters respectively. Brady was not the only running back to put up points for the Jumbos, as sophomore Dominic Borelli and senior Max Athy took the ball in from one and two yards out respectively. Brady finished with 174 yards on the ground to go with his three touchdowns. Sophomore quarterback Ryan McDonald added 84 yards on 10 attempts and Snyder was 7-13 passing for 73 yards.

Max Goder-Reiser Out of Left Field

Preston’s pick six was his fifth interception of the season — two more than any other NESCAC player this year. Senior defensive linemen Quinn Metoyer put on a show, with two sacks and a quarterback pressure on the day, as the team finished with a perfect 4-0 at home record for the second time in three years. Muzzonigro explained that as a senior, the pressure of Senior Day was something even he did not expect. “There were some extra nerves in it yesterday,” Muzzonigro said. “I don’t know, it was a little different; your parents are out there and it’s a little emotional because it’s your last time playing at home. But once the game starts, it’s football.” The Jumbos salvaged a rough first half this week, but will have to be on top of their game if they want to take down the Panthers (6-1) at Middlebury on Saturday. Tufts currently rests alongside Middlebury and Wesleyan for second place in the NESCAC behind 7-0 Trinity going into the final game of the season.

EVAN SAYLES / THE TUFTS DAILY

Sophomore defensive back Tim Preston begins a 99-yard touchdown return in the game against the Colby College Mules on Nov. 5.

Tufts to practice fundamentals until nationals in April TENNIS

continued from back in the last point of the match, it was winner-takes-all. Dartmouth missed its volley, handing the final nationals bid to Tufts. “When we were playing, especially that last match against Dartmouth, we realized right away after the first point which they won that this was going to be a cheering battle,” sophomore Dylan Sivori said. “When you are on the court and the other team’s side is cheering that much, it can get in your head no matter how good you are at blocking it out, so having the team there to cheer you on no matter what and pump you up just makes it an even playing field. It makes a complete difference in your mentality to keep fighting.” Team chemistry was a big factor in the team’s success, as the roster had an influx of enthusiastic first-years who had

an immense impact on the team’s overall mentality and positivity. Nationals has been a team goal for a year now, so when manager junior Suvi Rajadurai and Yang walked into the general interest meeting at the beginning of the year and told the team that they were going to nationals, the team was ready to take on the challenge. While tennis is typically more of an individual sport, the uncanny team chemistry was one of the biggest motivating factors for the players. “It was an electric atmosphere, I think we were the two loudest teams there, after every single point both benches were screaming, win or lose … We really just wanted to cheer on our team and keep their morale up and it worked,” sophomore Hannah Gould said. “Club tennis is the best part of my week and definitely my favorite thing since I got to Tufts.”

Now that the official club tennis season is over, the team is able to practice and work individually on match play and technique until nationals, which take place from April 13-15 in Orlando, Florida. Another goal of the team is fundraising, so that all of the players can be a part of the experience at nationals in April. “We are hoping we can make enough to subsidize the cost because playing club sports is a privilege, but when you fight for something like qualifying for nationals it’s awesome to have everyone who was involved have the opportunity to go and participate,” Rajadurai said. “I would hate to see someone who couldn’t afford to go who was such a big part of our team, [and] that applies to everyone because everyone on our team, even those who didn’t play at sectionals, brings some element to practice its inherent to tennis everyone plays differently.”

Long live baseball

ast week, we watched perhaps one of the greatest baseball games ever played; definitely an all-timer. Game 7 of the World Series between the Chicago Cubs and the Cleveland Indians had it all: excitement from the first at bat, a Dexter Fowler home run, an unexpected comeback against Aroldis Chapman in the form of a Rajai Davis home run and the end of sports’ longest drought. Major League Baseball (MLB) fans could not have been happier about the way this game was played. Game 7 was the perfect game to draw in casual fans as well as make fans out of people tuning in for the first time. At my house alone, I had nine people over to watch, most of whom were casual fans. But they stayed. They stayed through the pitching changes, through the rain delay, into extra innings and witnessed history. This World Series also made history in television ratings. The viewership for game 7 exceeded 40 million, the most for any single baseball game since game 7 of the 1991 World Series. Viewership increased 70 percent from game 7 of the 2014 World Series to last Wednesday’s game. These numbers are encouraging for a sport that many have suggested is dying. This year has seen postseason baseball ratings soar while football ratings have tanked. I think a large part of this trend has to do with the product each league is producing. The National Football League this year is, in a word, boring. The primetime games have been incredibly underwhelming, a result of either two mediocre teams or lopsided games. Some of the “marquee” match -ups the NFL has thrown at us include Jets vs. Bills, Jaguars vs. Titans and a tie between the Seahawks and Cardinals. The dullness of this year’s NFL has produced a massive decrease in ratings for the king of American sports. Monday Night Football ratings are down 20 percent, Thursday Night Football down 21 percent and Sunday Night Football down 18.5 percent. These results, while partially affected by the election, indicate that the NFL’s product is going stale. Baseball, on the other hand, is seeing more and more viewership. The number of television viewers has increased by 5 percent from last year, which is even more impressive when you consider the downturn in the NFL’s viewership and the 25 percent decrease in Olympic viewership. Baseball features a slew of young and exciting players to draw in a growing audience. Specifically in the World Series, players like Francisco Lindor, Javier Baez and Kris Bryant all brought a unique energy that is helping to revitalize baseball and make it fun again. This contrasts with the NFL’s crackdown on celebrations, for which many players have criticized the league. There are definitely improvements that MLB can make to repopularize baseball. I think this starts with decreasing the time of the game and rebranding it to a younger audience (I’ve seen enough Viagra commercials for a lifetime while watching baseball). But don’t let anyone fool you. Baseball is not dying and as this World Series exhibited, is here to stay. Max Goder-Reiser is a senior majoring in biology. Max can be reached at max. goder_reiser@tufts.edu.

16 tuftsdaily.com

Sports

Monday, November 7, 2016

FOOTBALL

Brady sets all-time career touchdown record in Colby rout by Eddie Samuels Sports Editor

In their penultimate game of the season, the 6-1 Jumbos beat the 2-5 Colby Mules 44-12 on Senior Day. Senior tri-captain running back Chance Brady broke tackles and records on Saturday as he demolished the career record for total touchdowns and single season rushing touchdowns. Brady’s three touchdowns on the day brought his career total to 30, shattering the record 28 running back Mike Krueger (LA ’82) set over three decades ago. Brady’s 14 rushing touchdowns this season struck down another record from the 1980s, as Paul Dresens (LA ’88) set the bar at 13 in his final season as a Jumbo. “I always joke with Chance [Brady]

that his stats are our stats,” senior offensive lineman T.J. Muzzonigro said. “We’re having a pretty good year, and it’s great to see him have this success. He’s worked hard for every stat and every record that he’s gotten.” The Mules won the kickoff and elected to defer, but the Jumbos took full advantage of the home field and weather conditions by forcing the Mules to kick into the wind, something that was especially crucial for Tufts in the first quarter. On Tufts’ first drive, the team lost a fumble when senior quarterback Alex Snyder and Brady missed on a handoff. Despite the error, though, the Jumbos were able to force a quick threeand-out series on the Mules’ first possession to recover possession. After that, the Jumbos took control

of the game, as their second series culminated in a touchdown at 10:18. Tufts started at Colby’s 26-yard line thanks to senior wide receiver Mike Rando returning a punt 32 yards. On the touchdown play, Brady took a handoff from Snyder and bounced it outside for a five-yard score. Senior kicker/punter Willie Holmquist’s extra point put the Jumbos up 7-0. “Our game plan going in is always to dominate physically,” Muzzonigro said. “We come out and execute our game plan; usually it’s focused on running the ball.” On Colby’s next drive the Tufts defense struggled to stop the arm of Colby junior quarterback Christian Sparacio, who connected on a 56-yard pass to sophomore wide receiver

EVAN SAYLES / THE TUFTS DAILY

Senior running back Chance Brady runs from a crowd of players in the game against the Colby College Mules on Nov. 5.

Sebastian Ferrell to set Colby up at Tufts’ four-yard line. “We knew that they were going to try to pass the ball quite a bit,” sophomore cornerback Tim Preston said. “We knew it would be a fun game for all of us defensive backs so we went in excited.” On the next play, Sparacio rolled out left looking for a lane to run and tossed a shovel pass into the end zone, which Preston intercepted at the one-yard line. With no white jerseys in his way he ran back 99 yards for a touchdown, the longest pick six for a Jumbo since 1952 and the first since 2010. “I think it was [senior defensive lineman] Tucker Mathers who was running the quarterback down and [Sparacio] made a bad decision,” Preston said. “He kind of threw it right to me and from there I was able to take it back to the house.” Holmquist missed the extra point, but made up for it with a 45-yard field goal on the next drive that put Tufts up 16-0 with 3:29 left in the first quarter. The Mules started out disorganized, but played significantly better in the second quarter, as the Jumbos failed to make serious headway offensively. A botched special teams snap paired with a blocked punt kept the Mules in excellent field position. Tufts also committed a number of penalties to further extend drives, including a roughing the punter penalty that allowed Colby’s offense to remain on the field. The Jumbos’ defense, as it has all season, bent but did not break, as the team held the Mules to just three field goals in the second quarter and no touchdowns on the day despite the momentum of the Mules’ offense. While the Jumbos were still up 16-9 at the half, coach Jay Civetti said he was not thrilled with how his team played through halftime. “We played very, very poorly in the first half,” Civetti said. “[There were] a lot of dumb penalties, two blocked punts. We put ourselves in a tough see FOOTBALL, page 15

Club tennis earns berth to nationals in Florida by Savannah Mastrangelo Contributing Writer

For the first time since 2012, Tufts club tennis is the only team from Div. III schools in the northeast to qualify for nationals, after clinching the fifth and final qualifying spot at sectionals at Harvard University. This was a high-intensity tournament with 29 teams in attendance playing for the coveted top five seeds in order to make it to nationals. Tufts was one of the only Div. III schools facing off against other Div. I and Ivy League schools, but the team did not let this deter them. “The Ivy League is definitely one of the best tennis leagues in the country, as you might expect, and so we were the underdogs going into every match we played, including the first round, so it was good to come out as the underdog,” junior Derick Yang said. The team won its first match against UMass Amherst, but then fell to Yale in its second match, earning a spot in the

consolation bracket. In order to qualify, the team had to then win the consolation bracket to clinch the final spot. The team then faced Brown and was challenged by Brown’s number one player, who was ranked No. 46 in the country. Going into that match, Tufts led by eight games. Brown slowly chewed away at that deficit, but was unable to surpass Tufts and the team pulled away with a two game lead. The team then faced off against Dartmouth in its final round, to determine which team earned a berth to nationals. The men’s doubles pair lost 6-2 and the women’s doubles pair won 6-2. At this point Tufts and Dartmouth were tied 8-8. After the singles matches, Tufts was down one game, 17-16, heading into the final match of the tournament, the mixed doubles. First-years Darren Ting and Zeynep Lir started this match down 3-1 (putting the team score down by a total of 3 matches), and Ting subbed himself out so that Yang could sub in. Yang then led the doubles pair to four straight wins, and see TENNIS, page 15

ZACH SEBEK / THE TUFTS DAILY

Club tennis team members first-years Darren Ting and Ross Sonnenblick play a practice doubles match on Nov. 1.