Olivier Douliery | Abaca Press | MCT

Newt Gingrich answers a question during the Republican presidential debate at DAR Constitution Hall in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, Nov. 22, 2011

The candidates competing for the Republican nominations include Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Gary E. Johnson, Buddy Roemer, Fred Karger and Rick Santorum.

“Gingrich is polling well right now, but I think Romney will be the ultimate winner,” College Republican President Jun Yoon said. “I prefer Romney because I think he will poll better with independent and moderate [voters] than Gingrich. It’s what is the most crucial in the general election.”

Yoon believes the Republican Party has a good chance of winning the 2012 election.

“I think the GOP is doing good. Researches have shown that economic conditions are the most important indicator for elections, and the voters are dissatisfied with Obama’s policies, and the economy is only going to get worse due to the Euro crisis,” he said.

According to a recent Gallup Poll, Gingrich is leading with 33 percent of voter support and Romney is coming in second with 23 percent. Ron Paul is currently trailing in third with 9 percent of support.

“I think that Mitt Romney is going to win the primary. Once we know who wins the primary, then we can tell what the GOP’s chances are of winning,” senior Joel Yambert said. “[Romney] has less negative backlash in media and social media than the other candidates.”

Yambert believes that the better image will benefit Romney in the long run.

“He is sometimes wishy-washy, but I agree with most of his stances,” he said. “On social issues he is pro-life and I am pro-life.”

However, there are also students who are less optimistic of the GOP’s chances in the upcoming election.

“I am not very hopeful for a good candidate to emerge from the primary to confront the Dems in 2012,” former College Democrats president junior Sherveen Mashayekhi said. “But I think Mitt Romney will win the nomination.”

Nearly everyone agrees that Romney will win the nomination.

“I think Newt Gingrich is going to win the primary in the Iowa caucus, and Mitt Romney is going to win the Republican nomination,” sophomore Jake Lyonfields said.

Lyonfields is critical of the way the Republican candidates have been running their campaigns.

“They have all said enough ridiculous or terrible things so none would be electable, especially their positions on social issues are out of the line with what the majority of Americans believe,” he said.

According to Leigha Empson, president of the College Democrats, the outcomes of the primaries and the general election are still up in the air.

“I think it’s hard to tell who would win the primary right now with all the recent changes. I think Romney would do better in the general election, but Gingrich has a big surge in recent polls, so he would be getting more campaign contributions…It’s too early to tell right now,” Empson said. “I don’t think any of the candidates stand any chance besides Romney. It depends on who wins the Republican nomination.”

Empson also believes that external factors beyond the candidates themselves will influence the GOP’s chance of success in the election.

“There are still a lot of variables, like the Supreme Court’s decision on health care, that would affect Obama’s campaign,” she said.

The Iowa caucuses will take place on Jan. 3, followed by primaries in January in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida.

Although both College Democrats and College Republicans have yet to start their campaigns, individual members from both groups have been working with national campaign organizations.

Junior Michael Rosengart, a member of Students and Young Professionals for Jon Huntsman (GenH) is working on Huntsman’s campaign for the Republican presidential candidacy.

“[Huntsman] has a lot to offer for voters of various political denominations,” he said.

GenH, chaired by Jeb Bush, has 139 campus chapters in 42 states, including four in Missouri.

“Governor Huntsman is a candidate who isn’t attached to talking points but to reality. Personally, that’s why I support him,” Rosengart said. “I interned in both the House and the Senate this summer, and there is nobody willing to tell it straight. Governor Huntsman will. It’s why he understands the threats of climate change and supports civil unions.”

Rosengart has been reaching out to the other members of the College Republicans about supporting Huntsman as the GOP candidate.

“We are planning to watch the next GOP debates [as a group],” junior Joel Yambert, president of the College Republicans, said. “As a College Republican, I cannot tell you who we are supporting yet.”

Sophie Schuit, the College Democrat campaign coordinator and a member of the Organizing for America (OFA), has actively campaigned for President Obama.

Organizing for America is a community-organizing project of the Democratic National Committee and is present on three campuses in Missouri. On Sept. 17, OFA led a phone-calling campaign, encouraging residents of University City to reelect the president. On Tuesday, the organization held a conference call among all the different university campuses across America to celebrate the DADT repeal.

Schuit was unavailable for comment.

“We haven’t started our campaigning yet, but we are supporting [Schuit] by telling our members about the phone bank,” College Democrats President Sherveen Mashayekhi, a junior, said.

Although the College Democrats are still planning their campaigning strategies, they will support President Obama in the upcoming election.

“While Obama hasn’t executed on the innovation of government we expected, he has done a solid job at keeping the nation moving forward, considering the truly difficult circumstances the economy and wars abroad have left him in,” Mashayekhi said. “His speech to Congress on the American Jobs Act was invigorating and demonstrated that he still knows when push must come to shove when it comes to the tragic comedy we call American politics.”

Difference in politics aside, most students working on campaigns are enjoying the experience.

“The Governor says it himself all the time. Most candidates will run away from their record. Governor Huntsman is running on his record. That’s refreshing and as a young Republican, it’s exciting,” Rosengart said.

The College Democrats and the College Republicans will meet head-to-head in the upcoming Campus Crossfire on Oct. 18.

Treasury absolutely did the right thing on Tuesday night by approving money for the purpose of bringing Al Gore to campus.

Gore is a generational figure, a man who introduced most of us to the confusing partisanship of American politics, who won a Nobel Peace Prize and who has done more than any other person to make humanity aware of the detrimental effects of global warming.

Maybe you disagree with me on those things. Say you are in the Young Americans for Liberty or your family was pushed out for the Oscar for best documentary in 2007. Because of those things, you hate Al Gore.

Then he is the perfect person to bring to campus. Students will be talking about him from now until the day he arrives (assuming all the negotiations go well). The controversy alone is something this campus needs. A real controversy. A controversy over ideals and Al Gore’s inherent value as a speaker and a public figure.

For a week or more, people might actually be interested in politics even though it is not a presidential election year.

Moreover, his profile (we can debate about its accuracy) is of an environmentalist. If there is something that this school has been trying to pass itself off as, it is an environmentally conscious university. Maybe it is because of our connection with the coal industry—or because we really care about being green—but the University has been trying very, very hard to project a sustainable image.

Bringing Al Gore will up our “going green” street cred in a big way. If you want to make it clear that you care about the environment, bringing Al Gore to campus is a great way to start. Besides, it never hurts to have someone talk about just how big our carbon footprint really is.

I don’t think that you can ever get enough warnings about the environmental problems our generation is going to face and just how much needs to change. If Al Gore is going to pick up our collective carbon footprint and slap us across the face with it, then that is a good thing, and it doesn’t matter how much it costs for him to do it.

Finally, this is a steal. The College Democrats (again, I am one, so I know) worked their butts off to get alternate sources of funding and seriously lower the cost. In the end, the cost to the students, because of the alternate funding, is substantially lower than it would normally be to bring Al Gore to campus.

That is why Treasury did the right thing by approving the funds for his appearance. Because regardless of whether or not you think “An Inconvenient Truth” was boring—or that Al Gore is a liberal demagogue—he is a world-renowned environmentalist, he is cheaper than normal and he is the biggest name to come to campus since the 2008 debates.

His is a name that will fill up the Athletic Complex, get people involved on campus and have people talking. His is a name that will have people mentioning this event for years as something that “I got to experience at Wash. U.”

Matt Mitgang | Student Life

Student Union treasurers cast their votes to fund the College Democrat’s appeal to bring Vice President Al Gore to campus in the spring. The total cost of the appeal was $92,350.

Student reactions to the decision are mixed.

The vote in favor of funding Gore for that amount was 12-1 with two abstaining due to conflicts of interest. All voting members were in favor of bringing Gore to campus, but one member was in favor of allocating more money.

Pending final contracts being signed, Gore is expected to come to campus this spring.

Sophomore Elizabeth Peters said that while she’d be happy to attend Gore’s speech, she doubts the College Democrats will be able to coordinate the event to fit his schedule.

“I’d definitely go because I like his government policy talks, [but] I’ll be incredibly impressed if it actually goes through,” Peters said.

Of the 263 people SU surveyed in the DUC Monday, 162 students voted in favor of bringing Gore to campus.

Some students said that they are happy that a well-known speaker is coming to campus, but not necessarily happy that it is Gore.

“I’m kind of a skeptic of global warming and his agenda for different reasons. But he’s a big name and I think that’s good for the University,” freshman Michael Kruse said.

Others said they’re excited to hear Gore speak, as long as his lecture isn’t just a rehashing of “An Inconvenient Truth”—his Academy Award-winning film from 2006.

“I’m really excited about it,” sophomore Andrew Ridker said. “I’m excited for both the political and environmental perspectives he can bring—it’s kind of getting an all-in-one.”

Leaders of the College Democrats said that the former Vice President, Academy Award Winner and Nobel Peace Prize recipient would be an ideal speaker, appealing to a diverse audience by splitting his discussion between government and sustainability.

Students at the SU Treasury meeting generally spoke in favor of funding his speech, even while some disagreed with his political views.

“I also support this—even though I’m not the biggest fan of the guy,” said junior Joel Yambert, president of the College Republicans. “I think that this will bring a big social and political group of people…and I feel like it’s a great effort.”

The event, originally costing $149,850, was presented to SU Treasury at a reduced cost by negotiating the cost of Gore’s honorarium and obtaining funding from the Danforth Center on Religion and Politics, the Department of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering, the Gephardt Institute, CS40 and the Department of Political Science.

The final cost of Gore’s honorarium was $110,000, which covers both his flights and his speech.

College Democrats ultimately appealed for $94,350, all of which was funded except for the $2,000 reception planned to follow his speech.

At the meeting, SU Treasury also allocated money to bring four small-cost speakers to the University.

Gore was the only “big speaker” on the docket. Asian Multicultural Council dropped its appeal to bring author and journalist Fareed Zakaria to the University earlier this week.

“After writing the presentation [for SU], our group realized Fareed Zakaria wasn’t exactly what the Asian Multicultural Council wanted to push for this year,” speaker for the group, David Yang, said. “It was a very sudden drop; we spent pretty much three to five hours writing the appeal, and then we were like—wait, this doesn’t make sense.”

The group joined the Korean Students Association in presenting its appeal to fund a speech by Daphne Kwok, an advisor to President Barack Obama.

SU Treasury funded their appeal for $2,021. Treasury also allocated funds to GlobeMed for Dr. Joia Mukherjee, Engineers Without Borders for TV personality Deanne Bell and Reflections for motivational speaker Jess Weiner.

Those groups were allocated $10,721, $8,150 and $6,727, respectively. Alpha Epsilon Delta, the pre-medical honorary society, was allocated $100 to hold a student discussion with Dr. Arthur Kleinman, who is coming as part of the University’s Assembly Series.

Partisanship is common in national politics and is also alive at Washington University. Members of political student groups on campus say they use the partisan divide to foster debate.

Senior Ryan Winograd, president of the College Republicans, said political disputes do occur between students at the University, but usually they are purely intellectual.

“I’ve had debates and I’ve had arguments with students. It’s never gotten violent. Ever,” Winograd said. “I guess that might be an issue at some schools, but I don’t think that’s an issue at Wash. U. I’ve definitely seen yelling, heated, maybe some name-calling.”

One upcoming debate between the College Republicans and College Democrats is Campus Crossfire on Monday night. Each group will have a representative debating the issue of health care.

The debate will consist of 45 minutes of formal debate, followed by 15 minutes of questions from the audience.

“It’s always fun,” said junior Katherine Berger, president of the College Democrats. “We always end up having the Democrats on one side of the room and the Republicans on the other, and there’s cheering.”

Winograd said he values the debate created by disputes among those with differing viewpoints. Although he said some political discussions on campus are unproductive, he believes it is important for the College Democrats and the College Republicans to play a leading role in promoting productive discourse.

“We definitely have students with differing opinions, and you do see them arguing about it sometimes. Sometimes it happens in a manner that I think fosters good discourse and enlightenment, perhaps on both sides of the issues, and other times it occurs in a way that is completely unproductive,” Winograd said. “I think the goal of the College Republicans and College Democrats should be to make sure that those sorts of debates and discussions happen in a way that is educational and not confrontational.”

Berger said she considers the partisan divide on campus to be a source of debate rather than a conflict.

“I think that people who are really interested in politics and particularly interested in partisan politics know that your political beliefs do not necessarily define who you are as a person, although it’s certainly an important part of it,” Berger said. “At least in my own experience, as much as we might argue over health care or the economy or the war, [or] whatever the subject may be, we’re all students. We’re all on that same sort of level.”

Winograd argued that debates and discussions between people with differing opinions are vital to the development of knowledge about an issue.

“[Dialogue is] the only way you can truly question your beliefs, grow your beliefs [or] change your beliefs,” Winograd said. “Maybe you actually know everything and that dialogue, the discourse strengthens your beliefs. But when it gets to the point of yelling or name-calling, you’re not really debating anything. You’re just staying with what you believe; you’re not questioning what you believe in any way.”

Another collaboration effort between political student groups is in the works. The College Democrats, College Republicans and the Association of Black Students (ABS) are coordinating another health care debate. The debate will involve politicians and policy experts from both ends of the political spectrum.

“That’s an example of more than just our two groups working together, but, more broadly, [we will work] with other groups in the school to bring what will hopefully be an enlightening discussion to campus,” Winograd said.

Winograd hopes these events will help to inform the public of important political issues.

“What’s important for me is …that when people make decisions, they are as well-informed as possible so that they can then apply their ideology and decide what their preferred outcome is,” Winograd said. “I may not agree with it—that’s fine. I actually really enjoy debating with students whom I disagree with to see why I disagree with them. What’s frustrating is when I’m debating with someone who doesn’t really have good reasons for their beliefs. For me, it’s more fun when they’re very well educated about [the issues].”

Thank God.

I live for the banter, for the dissent and dissension, as much as the next political buff. I love the formal debates on the same scale as the earnest conversations in line at Whispers. I cherish the site of College Democrats and College Republicans flyers hanging side by side like proud flags on every vertical surface on campus. Politics is an omnipresent force at this school: from the classroom to the dorm room, from the New York Times to Student Life, we are a community of diverse political ideas in the midst of one of the great American swing states. Is there any better place to engage?

If, reading this, you find yourself worrying that you may not fit in with this level of political fervor, simply ask yourself these questions. Did you spend Fall 2008 frenetically working for the Obama or McCain campaigns?  Did you recently vote in your first local election? Have you done community service or raised awareness for a cause? Have you stood up for something you believe in? Have you embraced this country as your home, be it temporarily or permanently?

You, my friend, are interested in politics. It is the force that drives your world, that has the power to make your passions into actions. So speak up and join up! Wash. U. is resplendent with College Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians all dying to make you a card-carrying member. If you’re not interested in partisanship, join Green Action or Students for Choice, volunteer with the Campus Y, run for Student Union office, or participate in any of the millions of student groups that pledge their time toward political and community action.

As you begin your career here at Wash. U., you will find yourself besieged from all sides by your fellow students waving brightly colored fliers and extolling the virtues of Group X and Club Y; offering the various seductions of pizza and candy and free pens to draw you like so many moths to the flame. At the same time, your advisers, deans, parents, residential advisors, and various well-meaning others will encourage you to pace yourself and not over-schedule your first semester. Eventually, you’re going to figure out where you fit between these extremes of activity and inactivity. My only advice for you as you embark on your time at this university is that you find something that has meaning for you: don’t shy away from engagement, from speaking out about your passions. Whether you care to admit it or not, you are interested in politics – embrace it, engage with it, and you won’t regret it.

Oren’s lecture will address many of the problems facing Israel today, including terrorism, threats from Iran, the nation’s military arsenal and changing demographics, among others.

The speech, titled “Israel in the Face of Existential Threats,” will largely focus on the future of Israel and how it can survive.

“I think it’s a different opinion they don’t perhaps get otherwise, to talk to someone who not only studies this in the classroom but also [offers] a good perspective for them,” Oren said in an interview with Student Life and the Jewish Light.

The event was organized to help educate students and develop a dialogue on campus about current Israeli issues.

“[We want to] reignite the dialogue regarding the Middle East on campus because we feel it’s not an issue discussed on campus, and it’s a shame, because we feel like we can make a really big difference,” said senior Ari Sasson, one of the event coordinators.

“Wash. U. has such a big Jewish community and we feel like it has the potential to do a lot of good, but it’s not really discussed. Bringing Michael Oren is just one part in this wider initiative,” Sasson added.

The event is cosponsored by  numerous student groups on campus, including the Jewish Student Union, the College Democrats, the College Republicans and the Political Science Student Association (PSSA). Many other community groups are also sponsoring the event.

According to senior Danielle Heiman, another coordinator of the event, so many groups are involved because Oren’s career touches on both the academic sphere and political sphere.

“The importance [of the event] is that it’s showing what we’re talking about doesn’t just necessarily have to do with Israel, but it has to do with general academic areas of interest that most Wash. U. students should be interested in on some level,” Heiman said.

The bipartisan nature of this event is something not often seen on the University’s campus.

The PSSA is serving mostly as a nonpartisan group to facilitate and coordinate the efforts of other groups involved.

According to junior Mark Dudley, president of the PSSA, this is a great way for different campus organizations to collaborate and appeal to a wider range of students.

“[The sponsors of the event] will send a message: This event is open and public discussion. It’s not going to be biased or slanted in anyway,” Dudley said.

Dudley said he hopes the groups can continue to work together after Oren’s visit.

“I hope it’ll be a chance for our four groups to get together not just once but in the future to bring events and speakers to campus. It’s kind of a coming-out for the four of us if you will, together, working on this event,” Dudley said. “I think if you really want to move forward and plan really strong events, the four groups working together with other groups is a great way to get things accomplished that are open to the student body.”

Oren has been a visiting professor at both Harvard and Yale universities and is currently a visiting professor at Georgetown University. He has published works in several national newspapers, including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

Oren is the author of two New York Times bestsellers and a fellow at the Shalom Center in Jerusalem. He has also testified before Congress.

First, the editorial ignores several important events that the College Democrats sponsored on campus this semester. The editorial commends the College Republicans for bringing high profile—albeit controversial—figures Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove to campus. While we strongly disagree with the ideology and actions of these speakers, we do agree that they succeeded in encouraging political engagement on campus. The editorial, however, goes on to state that the College Democrats “have not put on any major event that has stimulated the campus as much as the two sponsored by the College Republicans.” This is simply untrue. The editorial notes that the College Democrats brought Mo Rocca to campus in a successful event, but ignores other events the College Democrats hosted this year. Earlier in the semester, the College Democrats brought national security adviser Rand Beers to campus, an individual now under consideration to be the next secretary of state. At “Why Vote,” a Justin X. Carroll Residence Hall Honorary (XRHH) award-winning event hosted by the College Democrats, two Missouri State Senators and former “Rock the Vote” President Jehmu Green spoke to students. Finally, on the day of the debate, the College Democrats sponsored a speech by DNC chairman Howard Dean, an event that filled Edison Theatre with a crowd of more than 800, larger than the audience for either Alberto Gonzales or Karl Rove. Student Life—which reported on all these events—does not seem interested in whether the College Democrats have brought important political speakers to campus, but rather that they have not sought to spend tens of thousands of dollars from Treasury in doing so.

But more than just the inaccuracies and misrepresentations of our activities, we object to this editorial for its disregard of the College Democrats’ efforts to create political engagement on campus. The editorial says that the College Democrats should appeal to Treasury more often to bring outside speakers to campus, and describes having such speakers as “the most effective way to inform students of political issues.” We disagree. We support bringing political speakers to campus—and have consistently done so—but believe that political activity involves much more than just going to speeches. We feel that, above all else, it involves becoming engaged in the process. In this and past years, the College Democrats have been committed to this higher level of engagement. This semester, the College Democrats registered more than 1,000 students on campus to vote, and brought out more than 100 volunteers for voter persuasion and “Get Out The Vote” operations both on and off campus. With Missouri the last state to be decided in presidential race, and the margin between the two candidates less than 4,000 votes, the significance of this effort should not be disregarded. Our involvement in the campaign had an undeniably strong effect on this year’s election. Furthermore, it gave students a chance to be not just observers, but contributors to this election’s discourse. We believe that being politically active is not only about listening to speeches by those involved in politics, but becoming involved in politics ourselves. Student Life’s editorial suggests that “it’s time for the College Democrats to get to work.” During the course of this semester we have brought speakers, held forums, activated new voters and brought volunteers into a historic campaign.

We have been at work. And we will continue to do so.

Not so, most Washington University organizations said.

One exception to this, as may be expected, regards the University chapter of Students for Barack Obama (SFBO). Although it was never officially sanctioned by Student Union, the group will cease to exist now that the election is over.

Far from transitioning to presidential groupies, however, SFBO hopes that members will continue to be politically engaged through like-minded groups on campus such as the College Democrats.

Though senior Sophie Cohen, the SFBO chapter representative, anticipates that Obama will run for reelection in four years, she did not see the need for a specific group devoted to the cause at this point.

“I imagine in the future, Students for [Barack] Obama will not be in existence but will instead be present under the umbrella of College Democrats due to the absence of the importance of the primaries,” Cohen said.

The College Democrats are embracing this desired collaboration, along with the shared past experience of campaigning for Barack Obama with SFBO. The Democrats are hoping to build upon the grassroots action they employed in the campaign and to act as examples of Obama’s emphasis on public service.

“I think we underestimated the potential of Wash. U. students to vote in Missouri and change local politics,” junior Becky Hufstader, vice president of College Democrats, said. “Hopefully we’ll remember to focus on the student base in future elections.”

College Democrats will also seek to collaborate with like-minded groups, such as Green Action, PRIDE Alliance and Students for Choice. They are also searching for a “currently active political figure, such as an ex-presidential candidate” to bring to campus as a guest speaker, according to Hufstader.

This semester, the College Democrats and the College Republicans will also go head-to-head in Campus Crossfire, a biannual debate held with representatives from political and issue-related groups across campus. The focus this time is expected to be on the failing economy and steps the government is taking to mitigate the financial crisis.

In the coming semester, College Republicans will organize a “troops drive” to encourage monetary donations to troops, as well as some of their own item requests. They may also plan a film screening as an organization activity.

According to Senior Charis Fischer, president of the College Republicans, the organization will try and get another speaker, but it will depend on what kind of money and resources are available.

One organization that felt little impact from the election, however, was the College Libertarians.

“During the primary when Ron Paul was running, there was definitely a heightened interest,” sophomore Jeff Dreifus, co-president of the College Libertarians, said.

Once the former Texas representative dropped out of the running, however, the consensus on a mainstream political candidate was lost. Although some members passed out Ron Paul literature and distributed flyers explaining the candidate’s economic policies, the focus of the College Libertarians remained more discussion-based, rather than focused on action.

“We would be more action-based,” Dreifus said. “But most people dismiss libertarians as kooks anyway.”