The Bridges Auditorium reached near capacity for the 2024 presidential debate watch party, surprising the Student Government Association who sponsored the event. Chancellor Feyten’s appearance garnered excitement from the expectant crowd. Voices were loud as space continued to fill. The future leaders would offer their propositions to their constituents. A moment of considerable historical uniqueness determining the outcome of the next four years, Vice President Kamala Harris and President Donald Trump spoke to each other but also to the audience.
The cacophony of chatter came from the audience, often in disgust of Trump and support of Harris, and could be heard as if there was a theatrical play going between them. Snacks were being eaten, with an array of documents scattered around students’ seats as many were registering to vote. Propositions for protest and political support memorabilia from both the Denton County Democratic and Republican parties seated outside the auditorium.
The conversations amongst the students were of the political candidates’ past, such as the earlier conviction of President Donald Trump, Harris’ stance on Palestine and Israel, and the SGA at Texas Woman’s University. Multiple professors spoke before the debate commenced, each from separate fields of study.
“When the campaign season starts to heat up, we all pay attention to what’s going on. Those debates which we saw a couple of weeks ago are obviously a big deal,” stated Dr. van Erve, assistant professor of the Political Science department at TWU. “People were curious to see how Harris would perform on the debate stage. From the reactions I’ve seen in the media, I think she did really well in presenting herself as a presidential candidate who is capable of potentially fulfilling the role as president, she came away the winner of the debate.”
Both Harris and Trump began their debate with a formal yet forced handshake. After moderators asked questions, both quickly departed into rhetorical appeals, performing their arguments to the television audience. Through the student uproars and exclamations, Trump’s focal dispute seemed to anger listeners. One notable instance that evoked retorts was- after Trump claimed that Haitian immigrants were eating cats and dogs in Springfield, IL.
One of the panel speakers included Agatha Beins, an associate professor and program director for TWU’s Multicultural Women’s and Gender Studies department. “[Referring to Trump’s comment] it was a very visible way of categorizing people based on a social identity,” Beins stated. “Social identity is related to gender, race, social position and locations in society or community. It’s not so much about what is on or in your body, but about how you are situated in relation to others in a community. Unfortunately, sometimes these categories gain social meanings based on stereotypes. When the former president was mentioning immigrants, it stood out to me that he seemed to be referring to one specific group of people as the only immigrants in the country. Yet, of course we know that within any group of people there is a lot of diversity for various reasons. Which of course then left out people who came from all other parts of the world and constructed them in a way that gave them a very narrow, specific set of characteristics that presumably all of those people have.”
“In this debate tonight, you’re going to hear the same old, tired, playbook, a bunch of lies, grievances, and name calling,” Harris stated. She often referred to the lack of substantial answering of questions, lack of specific plans and repeated mentioning of immigration within Trump’s debate. The moderator’s insistence on covering issues including higher costs of living, tariffs in trade markets, and the insurrection of January 6th, Trump utilized his time to regress to immigration. In serving his former term in office, Trump has reshaped immigration policy in the U.S., and promises to continue his crackdown on immigrants.
“After being questioned directly about immigration, Trump returned to the topic again and again in the televised debate,” reported Los Angeles Times. “ At 6:46 pm., when asked about the Jan. 6th, 2021 insurrection, he avoided talking about his supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol and said migrants who are killing people should be prosecuted.” The repetition of Trump’s promise to reduce immigration in the U.S. has become the forefront of his campaign. The anti-immigrant policies that are promised to be given if Trump wins are great. “Trump’s promises and rhetoric on immigration during his second presidential campaign have been harsher this time around,” declared CBS news. “Trump’s immigration pledges would face formidable legal operational challenges, testing the limits of presidential authority and government resources.”
Trump used his time to rebut Harris’ claims, proud of his association with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, giving the states power to determine the extent of reproductive care. Despite his seemingly conservative views of abortion care in the United States, he has changed to a more moderate view. The crowd of students noticed the change of undertones that coincided with popular opinion for both candidates. “Trump has offered mixed messages about abortion over the course of the campaign. He has bragged about his instrumental role in overturning Roe v. Wade, while appearing to backpedal on the issue that polling makes clear is a liability for Republicans,” stated NPR.
However, questions as to the correlations between the candidates’ policies on other controversies arise. As stated by Brookings.com, “There is a dichotomy, almost a contradiction, in comparing Donald Trump to Kamala Harris on matters of defense and the military.” Similarly, there is presentable discussion on the candidates’ resemblance in terms of foreign policy in America. “Both candidates have expressed support for Israel and highlighted a need for the war to end,” stated Politifact.com.
“If you sit down, read each candidate’s policy platforms, and listen to how they speak about non-Americans, you quickly notice the similarities. Kamala Harris’ immigration stance is more border agents, decrease border crossings, and no plan to end family separation in detention centers,” stated Natalie Engelhardt, a political science major. “Donald Trump’s plan includes more border agents, deporting 20 million ‘illegal’ immigrants, building the wall, and continuing to separate families. The difference between the two in all actuality is minuscule, a both will continue to make the United States culpable in hundreds of unjustified deaths annually against people simply trying to make life better for their future generations.”
Both the Democratic and Republican parties have shown increased attention to immigration as the election comes closer. Despite this, there is a consensus that increased immigration is an issue that needs to be solved. Harris and Trump have coincided in encouragement towards limiting immigration rather focusing towards humanitarian crises. “It’s extremely problematic to all folks across the country,” stated by PBS. “What we’re finding is that over 75% of Americans do not support [mass deportations] that type of approach. Whether you are conservative or progressive, you likely work alongside someone who might be removed.”
Dr. van Erve explains the candidates moderate stances, whilst disappointing to polarized areas of the party, is a common tactic in politics.“There is a drive in politics to play to what’s called the median voter, the average voter somewhat in the middle of the political spectrum,” stated Dr. van Erve. “The equation comes down to a calculation that she can count on people who are far left to vote for her. This is what you see with her discussion of the war in Israel and Palestine. That was notably the only answer where the crowd here at TWU didn’t go hooting or hollering for Harris but sort of groaned.”
As indicated by Harvard Institute of Politics, “64% of young Americans have more fear than hope about the future of democracy in America.” Likewise, the Los Angeles Times suggests that “45% [of youth] said politics was having a negative impact on them.” Hopelessness and lack of trust in political efficacy appear to be in the rise amongst the youth of America. Pew Research Center presents its findings that “the public is somewhat skeptical when it comes to the ability of ordinary citizens to influence the government in Washington.” This blanket of discouragement was seen amongst TWU students as well. The avoidance to sufficiently answer questions caused disappointment throughout the debate. The cheers turned into groans, as students were unable to find clarity in both candidates.
“I want a politician to win my vote because they have a detailed timeline for how they will put policy into motion that genuinely benefits the lives of any person living on American soil,” stated Engelhardt. “Leading up to election days, both parties are trying to get the moderate vote, for better or for worse. Politicians have gotten far too comfortable leaning on their flimsy yard signs and TV ads to do their jobs for them, it’s time they have to get out and win some voters with real policy plans.”
The relevance of this presidential election is high, with the outcome of this election being the political determination of the next four years. Contested issues, as well as the opinions of voting Americans on these issues, will reveal if former President Trump will gain reelection or if the U.S. will have their first POC woman as president.
Register to Vote
Discover if you are already registered to vote here. Register to vote in Denton County here. The last day to register to vote in the state of Texas is October 7th. The Student Union at Hubbard Hall will be an early voting site from October 21st to November 1st.
Annalise Soto-serrano can be reached via email at asotoserrano@twu.edu
Check out what you’ve missed HERE
Be First to Comment