Tag Archives: Politics

The DSA Has Their Foot in the Door. Can They Take 2028?

Leave a reply

By Madelynn Martinez

For most of American history, change was gradual, occurring over generations.

Now there’s new kids on the block, and they’re looking to progress (pun intended) at a break-neck pace. 

The name alone would have made Ronald Reagan quiver: the Democratic Socialists of America. The DSA is among the oldest progressive organizations in the United States. Presently, it has two de facto leaders: Zohran Mamdani and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Mamdani’s success in the New York City mayoral election and AOC’s near-decade long tenure in Congress have generated mass speculation that the DSA may thrust its party members into the 2028 election. Mamdani is not eligible to run for president, but AOC is, and she has begun to hint at a potential run.

However, AOC’s track record is concerning at best. The Congresswoman from New York began her tenure in the House with a bang, attempting to pass the ambitious Green New Deal. At the time, AOC was the ideal progressive candidate, until her bill was shot down in the Senate in a landslide defeat of 0-57. 

As time went on, she shifted to the center. In recent years, AOC has pushed for “building bridges” and working within the current political climate; in 2023, she voted in lock-step with the centrist Democratic President Joe Biden 94 percent of the time. 

If AOC 1.0 was an expansive wind farm, AOC 2.0 is a natural gas plant with a pride flag painted over. 

When the Green New Deal failed, it became clear to AOC that establishment Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer would not support her progressive policies, thus leaving her socialist agenda dead in the water. 

With the death of her socialist policies and capitulation to the status quo, AOC’s presidential nomination would fail to stick out in comparison to her establishment counterparts. If she were to become president, her term could be akin to those of Presidents Biden and Obama before her.

This leaves the DSA in a predicament: Run a bridge candidate and lose out on key policy goals, or don’t run at all and let the status quo continue.

Miss the “Miss”: Patriarchy in Linguistics

Leave a reply

By Sacdiya Rashid

In my 17 years of living, one especially important lesson I’ve learned is that patriarchy is inherently entwined in how we speak. 

My first encounter with patriarchal ideas began on the first day of fourth grade. It’s an understatement to say I walked in ecstatic. Orientation has always been my favorite day. 

English is my second language; Somali was my first. So when chatter in the class slowly settled down, and my teacher introduced herself as Miss, I was confused. Miss? I thought it was Mrs.? Or Ms.? 

To answer both your question and mine, the difference between the three is marital status. Mrs. is a married woman; Ms. is generally an unmarried woman. Well, that’s the end. Thanks for reading… is what I would say if the distinction didn’t linger in my nine-year-old brain, creating a fixation none of my peers shared.

Lo and behold, the origins of this terminology derive from historical language. According to the University of Cambridge, “‘Mistress’ is the root word of both of the abbreviations ‘Mrs.’ and ‘Miss,’ just as ‘Mr.’ is an abbreviation of ‘Master.’”

Even before understanding the historical significance behind the terminology, I always wondered why women were identified based on their relationship status while men weren’t. Only women’s titles emphasize their connections to men rather than their honorific and name, which takes away the purpose.

Few people deny that patriarchal ideas exist in our language, but many critics argue that it’s too late for anyone to do anything about it. A common claim among many English speakers essentially boils down to “Okay, now what?” My answer is that it’s never too late to inspire change. The first step is clear: raising awareness.

If I hadn’t learned about the difference between honorifics in men and women on that day in fourth grade, I wouldn’t have even acknowledged the impact linguistics play in our lives. Awareness can be the difference between being negligent and making a difference. You can make an impact, one word at a time. It takes a single candle to light thousands. Be that candle.

ICE: Enemy of the People

Leave a reply

By Jorge Rodriguez

There are many qualities that make up the ideal President: empathetic, knowledgeable and considerate of everyone in the country.

None of these qualities are ones that our current President, Donald Trump, embodies. He is routinely dishonest and consistently demeans and marginalizes communities of color, specifically immigrants. This is most evident in his immigration policies and the deployment of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency.

Since returning to the Oval Office, Trump has issued more than 500 immigration-policy related actions. In his second term, ICE arrests have more than quadrupled, reaching roughly 1,200 a day, according to the Migration Policy Institute. 

It doesn’t just stop at arrests. Across the nation, cases of ICE abuse have surged. According to the National Immigration Project, at least 23 people have died in ICE custody this year alone.

In January, 42-year-old Honduran immigrant Luis Gustavo Núñez Cáceres died under ICE supervision in Texas. Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old resident of Minneapolis, was fatally shot by ICE officers the same month. Despite these atrocities, we see that ICE officers rarely face consequences for their actions. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in its most recent form, was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The agency was created to boost national security and enhance border enforcement after the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, and to assist in the removal of unauthorized people living in the United States.

In its first 20 years of activity, ICE served four presidents and kept a relatively low profile. Everything changed when Trump came back to office. ICE was no longer seen as an agency that protects us against terrorists. It became the parasite that kills us.

Raids became more frequent, detention centers have expanded and agents are now being  directed to prioritize arrests in communities with high immigrant populations.

Americans should be asking themselves: What happens when the protector becomes the enemy?

It’s Time for an Immigration Bill

Leave a reply

By Daniela Rosales 

The Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas has 65,000 seats. That’s almost enough space for the 65,765 individuals reported to be held in United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers as of July 2026. Almost, but not enough. 

The numbers keep growing, but Congress hasn’t passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill since 1986. The DIGNITY Act of 2025 (H.R. 4393) could change this. Introduced by United States Representatives Maria Elvira Salaazar (R-FL) and Veronica Escobar (D-TX), the bill would provide undocumented immigrants with dignity in the form of long-term legal status, protection from deportation and the ability to work and travel outside the U.S. It must be passed. 

In the 40 years since the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was signed into law, numerous election campaigns have promised the American people a solution. In an interview with PBS news, former President Joe Biden stated: “Within 100 days, I’m going to send to the United States Congress a pathway to citizenship for over 11 million undocumented people.” Likewise, former President Barack Obama said during his tenure that he was “confident” that immigration reform would pass.  

These promises have proved empty, leaving communities torn apart and America’s immigrants living in fear for their future in the country they call home. With bipartisan Congressional support from 19 Republicans and 20 Democrats, the DIGNITY Act offers a chance to ease that fear. It is clear that this is an issue that elected officials are willing to work across the aisle for.

Some say that the bill would be ineffective because it doesn’t tackle citizenship, but that doesn’t mean that the compromise it offers can’t move things in the right direction. The bill would allow undocumented Americans to stop hiding in fear and live their lives. It would pay respect to a group of people who have contributed trillions of dollars in tax revenue to the U.S. economy and have taken far less in welfare. 

Immigrants are the backbone of the United States of America. By passing legislation like the DIGNITY Act, we can actually make America great.

Make Your Own Mamdani

Leave a reply

By Alona Sanchez

When my sociology teacher included an article about Zohran Mamdani in a news rundown at the start of class, it raised questions. Why should I, a woman from a small town in Ohio, care about the politics of New York City? 

When it comes to Mamdani, there’s plenty to talk about. 

Mamdani’s campaign promises, among them a free bus system, free childcare and rent freezes, have put him at the forefront of many Americans’ minds. Gen Z voters have been especially taken with the young mayor. He is known for his active social media presence, which he regularly uses to interface with young people in New York City and beyond. 

It is a known fact that voter turnout for local elections is lower than voter turnout for federal elections in the United States. According to a study by the University of Chicago, voter turnout across all ages in local elections averages around 20 percent. In contrast, the estimated youth turnout for the New York City mayoral race was as high as 28 percent. 

Those who say that Mamdani is one-of-a-kind or that he can only exist in New York City are ignoring the role of higher voter turnout in Mamdani’s win. When elections aren’t well attended, voters let people who do not share their priorities make decisions for them. The more voters turn out in a local election, the more power they have to elect exciting candidates who share their values and concerns. 

The New York City mayoral election showed that engaging youth voters in local elections is possible, but young people elsewhere in the country can’t just wait around longing for a mayor like Mamdani to appear. Gen Zers should be turning their attention not to Mamdani, but to their own local government. If they want change, they need to head to the polls and vote.

Mamdani may not be your mayor, but that doesn’t mean he should be forgotten or ignored. Vote for the people you want to see in office. Make a Mamdani of your own. 

Question: Is Single-Issue Voting the Right Way to Go?

Leave a reply

By Therese Agbetiafa and Jorge Rodriguez

Certain identities come with certain social advantages. Not just small everyday privileges, but deeper ones that determine the risks people face when political decisions are made. The impact of a decision like the reversal of Roe v. Wade or the launch of a mass deportation campaign can depend on a person’s demographic. 

Single-issue voting is when a voter casts a ballot for a politician based on their feelings on one particular political issue or idea. For some, a single issue does not define their way of voting, while others reject partisan loyalty. 

In interviews with nearly a dozen people in Princeton, New Jersey, it became clear that a voter’s identity heavily influences their voting behavior, and their incentive to be a single-issue voter. 

“My background belies what people would think my voting ways are,” said Jordan Denning, a white man. “There are many elections where I do not like anybody running. So I don’t touch it… [I] just do my own thing.” Denning’s voting decisions reflect how he doesn’t always feel personally engaged in politics. 

Carolyn Galayda and Becca Goldman feel that as members of the LGBTQ community, their rights are particularly vulnerable. The couple votes with one goal in mind: Whichever candidate represents the underrepresented wins their vote.  

“We do look a lot at the opinions of the League of Women’s Voters… We’re gay, so we also have a lot of concern about that issue,” Goldman said. She and Galaya favor candidates who consider the rights of vulnerable voters in most, if not all, contexts. 

“So often I feel like I’m voting to not have the bad choice… I don’t want to lose my vote,” Goldman said. 

The sense of obligation to vote for the “lesser evil” was widespread amongst interviewees. 

Zain Shahabuddih, 26, brought a new perspective to the conversation, one of a young person who feels their impact is limited. Like Denning, Shahabuddih is not always motivated to vote. Not necessarily because he isn’t a vulnerable voter, but because he’s demotivated by the candidates. 

“If I were to vote, I would like to vote for one who was the lesser evil,” he said. “I [have] kind of been disenchanted with a lot of options.” 

Shahabuddih is not a single-issue voter by definition; in fact, he’s barely a voter at all. “I vote when it makes an impact,” he says. But he acknowledged that his background influences his values and how he votes. Shahabuddih may not vote in every election, but when he chooses to vote, he votes for candidates he believes can uplift his community. 

Ultimately, the question isn’t whether or not single-issue voting is the right way to go, but whether U.S. voters can unite across identity lines.

Single-Issue Voting Misses the Mark

Leave a reply

By Ximena Garcia and Max Rosenthal

Candidates run on multi-policy platforms, but “single-issue” voters cast their ballots for one. In Princeton, New Jersey, most voters base their decisions on the issues that affect them and their community the most.

“I think that, with the world, there are so many issues that we need to focus on that it’s really hard to narrow down a candidate on their single issue platforms,” said Gwynne Frischmann, 55, of Newtown, Pennsylvania. 

Even so, as a mother who works alongside young women, Frischmann acknowledged that female-centered issues influence her vote.

“It’s hard not to get caught up on platforms of abortion and just all the rights that are being taken away from women, especially young women in today’s world,” Frischmann said, but she feels that single-issue voting misses the bigger picture. 

“You have to step back and see what is best for the majority of people in the world, in your life, and your communities,” she said.

Kylie Gibson, 16, cares about other issues but will vote on what affects her the most: the economy. “Yeah, I mean it’s selfish, but [other issues] wouldn’t be my problem. I care more about my money,” she said.

The general consensus was that single-issue voting is ineffective in upholding democracy, but community members were conflicted about whether the problem is the single-issue ballot or the influence that sways it.  

Valrya Vega, 28, from Mexico City, feels that single-issue voting has failed to promote democracy because of bribery in her country. The Mexican government faced backlash after they unveiled new “scholarship” cards in 2021 that provided 1.2 million preschool, elementary, and high school kids with up to $24 a month for meals and supplies. These “Claudia Cards” resulted in accusations that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has used welfare programs to illegally gain votes and get ahead of future presidential opponents. 

“It’s like selling their votes for a little bit for scholarships,” said Vega. “They’re given money so [politicians] can buy their votes. So that’s a really bad issue.”

When it comes to deciding how to vote, interviewees said that political conversations don’t change the issues they vote on. But for Frischmann, discussing politics with her community is a way to share more about the issues she cares about. 

“I don’t think [these conversations] have impacted my issues,” she said. “It’s just changed how you can either be open or not open about discussing what’s important to you as an individual.”

With midterm elections around the corner, single-issue voting on abortion, the economy, and corruption is not going away. The question is: Will it sway the balance of power this fall? 

One Person, One Vote

Leave a reply

By Aryana Berhand and Joslyn King

How much of one’s personal values can be sacrificed for the sake of their country? In today’s political climate, many voters find themselves having to choose between the lesser of two evils. 

According to U.S. News & World Report, New Jersey is one of the most politically engaged states in the country. This is doubly true of Princeton, New Jersey, where residents spoke candidly about the influence of their values on their voting habits.

Several Princetonians rejected the philosophy of single-issue voting, keeping in mind the myriad of issues that affect not only our country, but the rest of the world, too.

“If the candidate’s gonna be in office, then their decisions will affect everything,” said Emma Cichone. “So you have to look at everything.”

This belief is held even among those who are not yet eligible to vote. “I’d have to look at the person’s values, not necessarily just their opinion on that one issue,” said Maddie Fowler, a local high school student. 

However, there is some recognition that single-issue voting is a prevalent practice in current times. Andrew Guo, who does not single-issue vote, believes that it is important to understand others’ views, especially in politics. He approached the conversation with empathy, understanding that voting can be difficult. 

“I think ideally you would judge a candidate’s worth based off of what he believes on all sorts of issues, not just one issue,” he said. Still, Guo could see why some people might gravitate towards single-issue voting. 

During the 2024 presidential election, the conflict between Palestine and Israel divided voters, though both candidates held pro-Israel ideals. Some people felt so strongly about this issue that they chose not to vote at all. 

For many Princetonians, voting is an important part of the civic responsibility they feel at the local and national level. While some people look at candidates holistically, others vote on the specific issues that are important to them. 

Whatever the case may be, one vote comes down to one person’s values. Sometimes, it comes down to one of those values alone.

One Vote is Rarely About One Thing

Leave a reply

By Aeryn Bautista and Yeisbel Peña

Sixty-six percent of Americans say they’re worried about global warming, according to Yale’s Program on Climate Change Communication. Forty-two percent believe that we’re heading toward a total economic collapse, a YouGov survey found.

For single-issue voters, just one of these concerns can determine their vote. 

Single-issue voting, or the practice of voting for a candidate based on their position on a single issue, has always been a part of American politics. According to some Princeton area residents, that approach is not the path to progress.

“I think you’re selling yourself short if you would vote on a single issue, right?” said Steven A., 31. In his opinion, single-issue voters are “basic.” 

Interviewees from Kingston, NJ, who voted in 2012 were happy to vote for Obama purely based on his handling of unemployment in the aftermath of the Great Recession. Nothing else felt nearly as pressing for them. Today, the same voters describe a more complicated, yet necessary, calculation involving abortion, war, immigration and all else that President Trump’s administration brought to the forefront of American politics. 

Robert Schmidt, 19, voted for Harris in 2024. “I just didn’t like Trump and any of his ideas,” he said. “I didn’t agree with a lot of what Kamala Harris was saying, but I just didn’t agree with Trump as a whole.”

Decades ago, voters relied on print media, speeches and debates for candidate information. Now, they can track aspiring officials’ every word on every policy through short-form content on Instagram, X and TikTok. 

Young people, in particular, find themselves worrying about all aspects of a candidate’s platform that social media draws into the limelight. Many identify themselves completely with positions raised by the left side of the aisle, highlighting how daily political content encourages polarization. 

Reese Eigenbauer, 14, expressed this sentiment in simple terms. “I just don’t really like Trump and what he stands for, and what he was planning on doing when he got into office,” she said.

Residents unfamiliar with the term “single-issue voting” rejected the label immediately once it was explained. 

“Absolutely not,” said Claudine Collins. Her support for Harris, she added, rested on “every reason under the sun.” 

If there was ever a time when a single issue decided an election, the people of Princeton suggest that it is long gone. 

“Life’s a lot more complicated than that,” said Steven A. “Society’s a lot more complicated than that. So why make your vote cast on a single issue?”

“We Cannot Protect People From It,” Says Mayor Freda on ICE 

Leave a reply

By Grace S.

On June 30, Princeton Mayor Mark Freda attended a press conference with the Princeton Summer Journal, where he discussed recent United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in the small New Jersey town. 

“Our police do not work with ICE. We do not support ICE in immigration matters in any way, shape, or form,” he said, expressing his dislike for the federal organization.

“It seems to me that ICE is concentrating on anybody that appears to be Latino. That is their A-number-one target, and so that’s problematic,” Freda said. Of the 15 people taken, he said he was “90-some-percent” sure that at least one had work authorization. “They’re going to work,” he said. “None of them are criminals.” 

Freda went on to discuss what his administration is doing to aid the detainees. One option is for the town to support the proposed New Jersey Immigrant Trust Act, which would protect immigrants and their personal information. The act has faced both pushback and support. 

“The Immigration Trust Act is something the state legislature will hopefully act on at some point,” Freda said. “People are concerned that if we pass the resolution in support of the act, that somehow, ICE and others will pay more attention to Princeton.” 

Freda faced pressure surrounding the legislation at a recent town council meeting. “We had probably about 60 or 70 people show up and were giving us a really hard time,” he said. Freda maintained that the act is a state matter and he is still undecided if he will support it. 

Despite immigration issues being out of his hands on a federal level, Freda still wants to support his constituents, as hard as that may be. 

“Why are we bothering these people? We cannot protect people from it. We just can’t,” he said. “It doesn’t matter. What resolution we pass doesn’t matter. We can’t. Until [things change] at the federal level, all we can do is offer help.”