Advocate
The Sun Devils’
“Whoever fears failure
limits opportunity”
Volume XLI, Number 2
Kent Denver School, 4000 East Quincy Avenue, Englewood, CO 80110
November 2, 2016
State Champions:
Congrats To Field Hockey!
Sun Devils fans storm the field after the Kent Denver field hockey team won the state title 2-0.
Photo by Caitlin Vickers
*** Election 2016: Special Edition ***
Graphic by Siena Fite
See Pages 2-13
Election 2016: Special Edition
Political Advertisements Make Big Impact
by Ashley Capoot
In the Oct. 24 broadcast of the Denver
Broncos “Monday Night Football” game, there
was an obvious abundance of political ads. In a
typical commercial break, football fans would
hear that one candidate is “unfit” to be President, while another is “dangerous” to have in
the Oval Office.
These opinionated political ads are commonplace during a Presidential election year in
Colorado. This year, according to Bloomberg
Politics, Hillary Clinton has spent nearly $173
million on television and radio ads, while Donald Trump has spent $58 million. In comparison, The New York Times reported that during
the 2008 and 2012 elections, candidates spent
over $2.5 billion on advertising alone. Though
less money has been spent this year, the candidates likely hope the impact of their ads will
remain the same.
“Usually, the goal [of a political ad] is to do
one of two things,” Rick Stevens, an associate
professor of media studies at the University of
Colorado, said. “It’s to create a stronger mob
of support for a candidate, or it’s to demotivate
and make [Americans] feel negatively about a
candidate. The second goal is easier, because
it’s a lot easier to activate fear or negativity in
the emotional center than it is to make people
feel positive.”
For example, the campaign of Donald
Trump is currently running a political ad that
predicts life in the U.S. if Hillary Clinton
were to be elected. The ad states: “In Hillary’s
America, the middle class gets crushed, spending goes up, taxes go up, and hundreds of thousands of jobs disappear.” In this instance, the
ad is clearly trying to convince voters to fear
Hillary and her policies, rather than campaigning directly for Trump.
Professor Stevens explained that the negative undertones in political ads generally attract
less educated voters and target these voters’
sense of morals and emotions. In an ad aired by
the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton appeals
to American nationalism by asking, “What kind
of America do we want to be? Dangerously divided, or strong and united?” Within that same
advertisement, Clinton advocates for the creation of new jobs but provides little details on
how this will be accomplished.
These broad policy statements frequently
appear in political advertising. According
to Professor Stevens, candidates use grand,
sweeping statements to help influence less informed voters.
“High information voters consume too
much information to be moved, and they tend
to be very literate and critical of those kind of
messages,” Stevens said. “The ads are a very
efficient way of getting low information groups
to change their opinion.”
Candidates are often motivated to include
untrue information in their ads to help them resonate emotionally with voters. One political ad
denouncing Trump claims: “He bans disabled
veterans from his high rise on Fifth Avenue.”
This is an untrue statement, yet it successfully
conjures a strong emotion among viewers. Professor Stevens explained that lying in political
advertisements is “completely legal” because
candidates, like all Americans, are guaranteed
free speech by the First Amendment.
Since July 1st, 2016, some 3,396 political
ads have run in Colorado. It is likely that many
more will air before Election Day. While the
candidates vie for attention in these final weeks,
be sure to pay attention to the content of their
ads.
Fun Facts About Past U.S. Elections
by Reagen Haecker
1. Since the 1800s, elections have occurred
in late fall. Back then, farmers were not able to
travel until the harvest was completed, but they
also needed to beat winter weather conditions.
2. Norman Thomas of the Socialist Party ran
for President for a record six times, but he was
never elected.
3. During the 1920 Presidential election, a
candidate from a third party, Eugene V. Debs,
was jailed for opposing U.S. involvement in
World War I. He ran his campaign from prison
and ultimately won 3% of the popular vote.
4. At 135 words, the shortest inauguration
speech was given by George Washington. At
8,445 words, William Henry Harrison’s is to this
day the longest. He spoke for over two hours
in a heavy snowstorm, causing him to catch a
cold. He died from pneumonia one month later,
also giving him the record of the shortest term
in office.
5. American astronauts orbiting on the International Space Station can vote in elections by
secure email.
6. The United States is ranked 139th out of
172 countries in voter participation.
7. In 1946, page one of the Chicago Daily
Tribune mistakenly declared that Thomas Dewey beat Harry Truman in the election.
8. The 1800 election was so heated that the
Vice President at the time, Aaron Burr, killed
former Secretary of the Treasury Alexander
Hamilton four years later in a duel.
9. In 1872, Victoria Woodhull became the
first woman to run for U.S. President. This
was nearly 50 years before 1920, when the
passage of the 19th Amendment granted suf-
Page 2, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
Graphic by Ashley Hernandez
frage to female citizens.
10. Barack Obama is known as the nation’s
44th president, but in reality, there have only
been 43 different Presidents in office. Grover
Cleveland is counted twice as our 22nd and
24th President, because he was elected for two
non-consecutive terms.
11. The tallest U.S. President was Abraham
Lincoln, at 6’4”. The shortest was James Madison, at 5’4”.
12. The U.S. Marine band has played at every Presidential inauguration since 1801.
v
c
i
t
n
A
D
s
s
e
C
h
C
t
a
P
s
i
c
t
a
u
r
t
e
t
n
v
t
d
t
d
r
p
t
s
d
F
t
w
b
a
b
z
Election 2016: Special Edition
Students Share Voices Through Campaigning
by Caroline Oudet and Julia Doyle
With the upcoming election, there are many
volunteer opportunities available through political campaigns. Kent Denver junior Sydney Gart
is volunteering for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and U.S. Senator Michael Bennet’s reelection campaign, while sophomore
Alice Noble volunteered last summer for the
Democratic Party. Despite the fact that these
students cannot yet vote, they are determined to
share their voices and make an impact on the
election.
Gart said she was approached by a fellow
Clinton supporter and asked to canvas on behalf of the Democratic Presidential candidate.
Canvassing means that she travels from house
to house to ensure that registered Democrats
are voting for Clinton. If they say they are not,
she attempts to persuade undecided voters. She
started canvassing for Senator Bennet’s campaign a few years ago, and she said she is still
working to get voters on his side for the upcoming election.
Noble became involved with the Democratic Party last year when Dr. Chandler encouraged
students during an assembly to apply to be a fellow. After providing references and conducting
an interview, Noble succeeded in becoming a
fellow. Last summer, she also canvassed and
encouraged non-registered voters to register.
Noble said her most memorable moment
was when she walked from the RiNo area to
downtown and back in 90 degree heat and did
not register a single voter. “Walking all that
time, asking people who didn’t want to be talked to if they were registered to vote, I just kept
reminding myself how important voter registra-
tion work is,” Noble said.
As Gart and Noble are young contributors
in a mostly adult setting, it can be difficult for
them to share their voices and contribute in the
political spectrum. Despite these difficulties and
not being able to vote, Gart said, “I’m trying
to do as much as I can to help educate people
about the candidates. There are still ways for
young people to help out through voter registration, canvassing, and much more.”
Gart, Noble and other canvassers make a big
impact on the election because they emphasize
the importance of voting, help people gain more
information on a candidate, and ensure that voters feel confident in their vote. These two students demonstrate that age does not have to be
limiting. Young people can contribute to politics and make a difference.
Social Media Dominates During Election Season
by Willa Sobel
The incorporation of social media in the
Presidential election of 2016 is unlike anything
seen before in American politics. Unlike America’s first elections, where information about the
candidates was difficult to find, the current election almost has too much information. There
are multiple unbiased news sites including Reuters, The New York Times, and Politico, where
readers can find fact-based information about
the candidates. The issue, particularly with this
election, is that poorly informed voters receive
their information on candidates from biased
new sites, and even worse, social media.
tion is both candidates’ presence on social media, specifically Twitter. Together, Donald J.
Trump and Hillary Clinton have over 20 million
Twitter followers. Both campaigns regularly
tweet articles, links to websites, and even the
candidates’ own unfiltered opinions. Trump is
known for late night tweets, while Clinton is
known for pointed comebacks and video advertisements.
In order to make uninformed decisions, voters must receive their information on the candidates from reliable, unbiased sources. Voters
should be wary of the unfiltered opinions that
pervade social media.
Social media’s role in politics can be controversial. From one perspective, it brings people
together. For example, supporters of either candidate can find a safe space to talk and express
their opinions on Facebook groups. Social media has also become an effective form of outreach to get citizens registered to vote.
Conversely, social media is a place where
people can share their lives and unfiltered
thoughts and opinions instantly. This election
seems to be transpiring on every social media platform out there, whether it is Snapchat,
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or Reddit. Across
these platforms, supporters voice their opinions
whether or not they are true. This is hazardous
because uneducated voters can easily develop
an opinion based on a biased and false Facebook status instead of reading the facts.
One unusual aspect of this particular elec-
Graphic by Cecily Coors
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 3
Election 2016: Special Edition
by Ellie Sullivan
The two major candidates competing in the
2016 Presidential election - Democrat Hillary
Rodham Clinton and Republican Donald J.
Trump - are among the most different in the
history of our nation. Their opinions contrast
on almost every issue. Below, their positions
and plans on 10 significant issues are detailed,
based on each candidate’s website: www.
hillaryclinton.com and donaldjtrump.com.
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Education:
Hillary Clinton has three major plans to
improve education in America. First, she plans
to make preschool universal for all families.
Second, she would raise teachers’ salaries. Finally, she plans to make college debt-free. She
has proposed to make community college completely free and to make state colleges free for
families making under $125,000 annually.
Healthcare:
Clinton supports the Affordable Care Act;
however, she also hopes to increase its benefits
by making it more accessible to all, moving her
one step closer to her goal of universal healthcare. She also aims to lower the price of prescription drugs and make Medicare available to
people over the age of 55.
Gun Control:
Although Clinton supports the Second
Amendment, she hopes to reduce gun violence
in the United States by implementing increased
background checks before gun purchases. Under her proposed plan, people with a criminal
record, the seriously mentally ill, and individuals on the no-fly list would not be able to obtain
guns.
National Economy:
Clinton’s tax proposals are created around
the middle-class working families. Her tax plan
increases taxes to 30% on millionaires and closes any loopholes to evade taxes for the wealthy.
However, this plan does not raise taxes at all on
families making under $250,000 a year. Economists predict that through her proposed spending plans and taxes, the national debt will grow
around 86% over the next 10 years.
Women’s Rights:
A major issue for Clinton throughout this
campaign has been equal pay. Because more
women make minimum wage than men and
often don’t receive paid leaves, she has proposed a higher minimum wage and increased
Clinton vs
paid leaves. She also
supports Planned Parenthood and is prochoice in regard to
abortion.
Environment:
Clinton believes
climate change is real
and that stopping it
is a priority for our
country. Within a decade, Clinton aims
to provide a renewable energy source
to every household
in America by creating the Clean Energy
Challenge. If implemented, this challenge would make
solar energy cheaper
and more accessible
to everyone.
Trade Policies:
Clinton has not
laid out any major
new trade proposals.
Instead, she plans to
renegotiate the North
American Free Trade
Agreement
(NAFTA), originally signed
by her husband, and
is against supporting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Immigration:
Clinton intends to make the path to citizenship easier for immigrants and encourage them
to become citizens. Additionally, she wants to
stop deportations that separate parents from
their children.
Jobs:
Much of Clinton’s campaign has revolved
around creating good jobs for everyone. If
Page 4, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
Graphic by Siena Fite
elected, she would invest in new infrastructure,
small businesses, scientific research, and new
energy sources, creating an estimated 10.4 million new jobs.
National Security:
Clinton plans to stand by and strengthen all
of our alliances and invest more money in our
military. With our allies’ support, and with an
even stronger military, she plans to take down
terrorists such as ISIS and other jihadist terror
groups.
Election 2016: Special Edition
vs. Trump
Donald John Trump
Education:
Donald Trump is adamantly opposed to the
Common Core Initiative and would abolish it if
elected. Although he believes student loans are
a problem for our country, he does not support
Clinton’s plan to make public and community
colleges free.
Healthcare:
Trump believes that the Affordable Care Act
is not working and results in higher costs for
fewer health benefits. He plans to repeal it immediately and increase the competition among
insurance companies. This competition is projected to lower insurance prices, allowing for
cheaper coverage for the American people.
Gun Control:
Trump strongly supports that the right for
people to bear arms should not be regulated
in any way. He would appoint Supreme Court
Justices who share the same opinion and repeal
laws that require background checks and limit
the amount of ammunition a person can buy. Instead of infringing on the Second Amendment,
he plans to take the mentally ill, violent people,
and gangs off the streets so that they no longer
pose a threat to the public.
National Economy:
The tax plan Trump has proposed reduces
taxes for everyone in every income bracket.
It has the largest cuts for businesses, reducing
their taxes by 20 percent. Economists predict
that Trump’s proposed tax and spending plans
would grow our national deficit by around
105% over the next 10 years.
Women’s Rights:
Trump disagrees with the current laws on
abortion and would fight for pro-life. He also
supports equal pay for women, but thinks new
laws regulating salary are not necessary.
Environment:
Trump does not
believe man-made climate change is happening and has proposed no measures to
address it.
Trade Policies:
Trump thinks that
America is getting unfair trade deals from
other countries. He
proposes renegotiating free trade in North
America and is not in
support of the TPP.
Immigration:
Trump’s major plan
for immigration is to
build a wall across our
border with Mexico to
stop illegal immigrants
from entering the United States. In his plan,
Mexico covers the cost
of this wall. He would
negotiate a trade deal
that favors Mexico’s
economy. He would
have much stricter immigration forces working to deport illegal
immigrants.
Jobs:
Graphic by Josaleigh Powers
National Security:
Under Trump’s tax proposal, he believes that
reduced taxes for businesses would increase the
amount of people they can hire, creating more
jobs. He also plans to reclaim jobs from other
countries, claiming: “[Other countries] are
taking our jobs. They are taking our wealth…
We’re going to bring that money back.”
Trump would increase the number of soldiers in our military and the resources the Marines and Air Force currently have. He would
also create a stronger missile defense program
to defend the United States from countries such
as North Korea and Iran.
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 5
Election 2016: Special Edition
Clinton, Trump Campaigns Vie For Colorado
by Alie Goldblatt
The final sprint is on for the Colorado Democratic and Republican
Committees to attempt to swing the state either blue or red on Election
Day (Nov. 8). Both parties have strategic methods in place to influence
voters and encourage them to turn in their ballots, but they differ in their
approaches.
The Sun Devils’ Advocate sat down with Kyle Kohli, the
communications director for the Colorado Republican Committee. After
the interview, it was apparent that the primary focus of this local party
branch is to personally connect with individuals and educate them about
issues related to the First and Second Amendment, as well as healthcare
in our state. The Republican Committee encourages citizens who agree
on the importance of these issues to voice their opinions and vote for the
Republican candidates on the ballot.
Kohli also emphasized that use of social media is growing every
year and now comprises an important component of the campaign. The
Republican Party views Facebook as a site used by most average voters
and Twitter as a site primarily used by activists. Kohli said he prioritizes
Facebook as the place to reach younger voters, as it provides a platform
to experiment with new ways of networking and connecting, including
creating spinoffs of popular pages and videos pertaining to the election.
The local Republican Committee has narrowed its focus to clear
conservative areas in the state, including Colorado Springs, El Paso
County, and the Western Slope, Kohli said. But the Committee also
believes in targeting voters in Denver to help cut the margins elsewhere.
On the other hand, the Colorado Democratic Party has been trying to
influence voters on different levels, targeting demographics in specific
ways. It recently held the Stronger Together Social Summit in downtown
Denver. At the event, the Committee hosted a panel of Democratic
activists who discussed the necessity of social media to influence and
engage the millennial generation in the upcoming election, which, they
said, will play a pivotal role in deciding the outcome of Colorado’s
election. The Colorado Democratic Party has employed methods to
target this critical demographic through Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook,
Twitter, and even memes.
With events like the Summit, the Democratic Party has continued to
encourage individuals who will vote for the Democratic candidates to
share their stories with online users in their personal circles. One of the
members of the panel, Adam Mordecai, the editor-at-large at Upworthy,
an online site that shares trending articles, said events like the Summit
are beneficial for the Party. “The more local it is, and the more personally
connected you are to something, the more likely [others will] take it
seriously,” he said.
Both parties have emphasized authenticity as the most important
aspect of their efforts to encourage people to vote. In regards to social
media, Kohli concluded: “It’s important to try to be as authentic as
possible and try to give people a window into [the candidate] and [his or
her] personality and [his or her] candidacy that you wouldn’t necessarily
get on a billboard.”
Bennet Maintains Lead In Senate Race
by Brandon Pike
It may seem that everyone’s focus is on the dramatic Presidential
race, but, in fact, Colorado voters have another big decision to make:
who will serve as our state’s U.S. Senator? Incumbent Michael Bennet,
a Democrat, and retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Darryl Glenn, a
Republican, are competing for one of the state’s Senate seats.
According to the polling data aggregator Real Clear Politics, Bennet
has a 12.6% lead over his competitor. In fact, Bennet has maintained a
substantial lead over Glenn for the entire campaign. Currently, there is no
indication that Glenn will drastically gain voters.
Glenn is a likable candidate for some voters, in part because of his
belief in education reform. As he states on his website, education funding
should not be handled at the federal level: “I believe those dollars should
be returned to Colorado so parents, teachers and superintendents have
the freedom to make choices and direct the education of their kids.”
Still, it looks increasingly likely that Michael Bennet will win the
Senate election. Why? Perhaps Bennet’s proposal to invest $300 billion
in small businesses has resonated with voters. During his time in the
Senate, he oversaw the investment of $18 million into Denver schools
and classrooms. He also has six years of experience working in the
Senate. All of these qualities seem to have appealed to Colorado voters.
Another potential reason why Bennet is ahead in the polls is that
Glenn has endorsed controversial Republican Presidential nominee
Donald J. Trump. Each voter has his or her own views about Trump,
but Hillary Clinton is leading Trump in Colorado polls. In addition,
Colorado as a whole is expected to lean left this Presidential election,
making Bennet a more appealing candidate than Glenn.
Page 6, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
Graphic by Alex Wimer
.
o
c
n
c
d
y
s
o
,
o
o
e
,
t
y
t
t
l
s
r
y
Election 2016: Special Edition
Johnson And Stein Offer Alternative Policies
by Jack Landgraff
American political history has long been dominated by two-party
politics. However, there are other options. In recent elections, the Green
and Libertarian Parties have been the most prominent of the so-called
“third parties.”
The Green Party has a presence in most, but not all states. It states on
its website that there are at least 100 elected officials who represent the
Green Party, most of them located in California. The Libertarian Party
is slightly larger, with 147 Libertarian officeholders around the country.
Additionally, Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Presidential nominee, is on
the ballot in all 50 states. Jill Stein of the Green Party made it onto the
ballot or write-in status in 48 states, including Washington, D.C.
These candidates have both consistently polled behind the major
party nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump, but they poll
high enough to suggest they could make an impact come Election Day.
Johnson, the former Governor of New Mexico, has polled nationally
around seven percent, and Stein, three to four percent. Neither of these
candidates could win the race, but both could affect the eventual outcome.
Each party has a unique stance on global issues.
Americans to native Hawaiians. The Green Party considers healthcare
and a living wage as human rights, and all citizens would be provided
housing. Jobs would be guaranteed by the government at last resort, and
everyone would receive health care for all ailments. When it comes to
drug issues and the prison population, the Green Party is heavily in favor
of dramatically reducing the prison population and ending prosecution
for many drug crimes.
Libertarian Party
In 1971, a small conference led to the formation of the Libertarian
Party. In 1972, the party’s first ticket earned the first and only electoral
college vote from Roger MacBride
of Virginia, who went rogue and
voted for the ticket of John Hospers
and Theodora Nathan. The party
stands for the right of individuals
to do whatever they want as long
as the individual does not interfere
with someone else, and asserts that
government always gets in the way
of that right.
The platform begins with
a section on personal liberty.
The Libertarian Party supports
individuals’ rights to make any
sort of choices. However, no one is
permitted to initiate force against
another person. The platform also
strongly stands for the right to any
sort of religion.
Green Party
The Green Party put its first ticket on the ballot in the 1996 presidential
election. The Party nominated Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke for
President and Vice
President, respectively.
The pair won 0.7%
of the national vote.
Since then, the Green
Party has retained its
focus on the same
ideals of saving the
earth,
promoting
local economics, and
pursuing social justice.
Each of these ideas can
be seen in the party’s 10
core values, as well as
the four sections of Ms.
Stein’s platform.
The
platform
begins by promising
to protect individuals
and democracy from corporations. A Green Party government’s foreign
policy would put a large emphasis on reducing American military
presence abroad. On trade, the party seeks to renegotiate many of the
national trade deals to protect the rights of workers. As far as domestic
security, Stein would immediately repeal the PATRIOT Act, a Bush
administration policy intended to stop terrorism by expanding the
government’s surveillance authorization. The platform’s major tenets
appear to be making the U.S. less of a domineering force in global
politics, while encouraging global demilitarization. On the home front,
the Green Party prioritizes protecting everyone’s rights, especially those
guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Graphic by Claudia Bautista
The platform also addresses social and economic justice and plans
to provide reparations to many minority groups, ranging from African-
Interestingly, the party dedicates
one simple line to the death penalty;
it stands in direct opposition to its
use. The Libertarian Party also legitimizes the use of force only in selfdefense and stands against any government law that prohibits or monitors
the selling and buying of firearms and ammunition. On the issue of
abortion, in agreement with the Green Party, the Libertarian Party says it
will leave the decision up to each individual. (Note: The platform begins
by guaranteeing the “right to life.” This statement should not be equated
with the Republican Party’s belief in “right to life” in the sense of antiabortion.)
Graphic by Siena Fite
In terms of economic liberty, the Libertarian Party would
guarantee a free market wherein the only role of government would
be to protect property rights and provide a legal framework for trade.
The platform vigorously opposes any and all government subsidies,
while also positing that a free market would force people to protect the
environment. The Libertarian Party directly opposes the notion that
healthcare is a right, and states that it should be provided by a free market
system. The Libertarian Party would also phase out Social Security and
many other government-guaranteed entitlements.
In a final section on securing liberty, the platform suggests that
the U.S. military would remain very well funded but stray from being
involved in the world. The PATRIOT Act would also likely be repealed,
as civil liberties would be prioritized by a Libertarian President. It also
notes that while individuals have some inherent rights, no right forces
someone to have an obligation to serve someone else.
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 7
Election 2016: Special Edition
School Community Opines On Politics
Last month, Mr. Chalfin sent out an electronic survey to the entire student body about political beliefs, especially in relation to our nation’s
upcoming Presidential election. Responses were collected anonymously. More than 210 students responded. The Sun Devils’ Advocate has compiled
some of the responses below, in addition to complementary essays written by students in Mr. Chalfin’s semester-long “Power of Politics” elective.
Are Televised Debates Worthwhile?
by Willy Verneris and Alex Oro
This year, the set of three formal debates between Donald Trump and
Hillary Clinton have attracted millions of viewers. But do they actually
help the public understand where the candidates stand on the issues?
Pro
Presidential debates are worthwhile because they force candidates
into difficult situations, where they must be well-informed while also
able to explain complicated topics. In debates, candidates are forced to
come up with responses quickly and deliver them effectively. Debates
offer the candidates an opportunity to show how they can respond, and
are therefore an integral part of every campaign.
The debates also allow candidates to show how informed about the
issues they are. They must give a well-informed and educated response.
They have to know what they are talking about, and they must be able to
recall that information at a moment’s notice. Debates allow to electorate
to learn if the candidates really know what their own policies.
Finally, debates force the candidates to distill their complex policies
into understandable explanations that resonate with American voters.
Page 8, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
Debates allow voters to actually understand what the candidates stand
for, so they can make an educated decision at the ballot.
Con
Presidential debates are not worthwhile because candidates are not
given enough time to produce real solutions to the problems that are
presented to them, instead forcing candidates to reduce their answers
to two minute sound bites. During Presidential debates, candidates are
given one to two minutes to answer complex questions on the economy,
racial problems in America, social policy, and more.
During debates, the moderator often cuts off candidates, leaving the
actual debate unfinished, and forcing candidates to respond with simple,
canned answers that do not actually respond to the question. While
these answers are easy to hear, they do not reveal anything about the
candidates’ policy on important issues.
When a candidate only has a minute to respond to a question, he
or she often reverts to safe answers generally espoused by their party.
The style of debate we have now leads to uninformed voters and allows
politicians to get away without explaining their platforms.
Election 2016: Special Edition
Students Share Opinions On Privacy, Voter Rights
‘The people in our country should not
know, or have the right to know, everything
about our political candidates.’
‘Take away a person’s right to apathy, and
you take away his or her freedom.’
‘So many people have fought for the right
to vote, and it is your responsibility as an
American to exercise that right.’
Ballot Measures Could Change State Constitution
by Henry Rogers
Every four years, during the Presidential and general elections, voters
across 35 states vote on ballot measures for their respective states. What
is a ballot measure? It is a piece of proposed legislation that received
enough signature petitions to be placed on the ballot and is now either
approved or rejected by the general public. These measures can be
amendments or statutes that can be created and proposed by everyday
citizens who feel the need to organize a movement to make a change
within their community.
As you drive around your neighborhood during this election season,
you may see signs in front of houses that may say, for example, “Vote Yes
on 4B.” These signs are examples of ballot measures. Many proponents
place signs in their yards to express their opinions and get the word out
to vote on that specific piece of legislation.
In each state, it is required that each person who is voting for a
Presidential candidate or any other candidate vote on the ballot measures
of their state. Some ballot measures do not have the most transparent
impact on the community, but others can be very controversial and
change the identity of the state. For example, the passage of Amendment
64 in 2012 legalized recreational marijuana use throughout Colorado.
Ballot measures can also influence the way in which people vote
presidentially, as some ballot topics might sway beliefs one way or
another. Therefore, it is important for voters to educate themselves on
what they will be voting for during this 2016 election.
This year, a total of nine ballot measures, two legislative referrals,
and seven initiatives will appear on the Nov. 8 ballot in Colorado. Some
of the issues addressed on this year’s ballot are minimum wage, universal
healthcare, direct democracy, and assisted death.
One of the amendments that may have the biggest impact in the
future is Amendment 71, which would make it harder for ballot measures
to be created in the upcoming years. This amendment would make it
harder for measures to be passed, by requiring a 55% vote for the created
idea and requiring petition signatures to be received from all of the
state’s districts. This would be a change to the current system, which
only requires a simple majority and all signatures can be from the same
district. People who are in favor of Amendment 71 claim that the change
will create an equal voice for Coloradans who live in rural areas to share
their ideas with citizens in urban cities.
Other proposed measures include Amendment 70, which would
increase the minimum wage, Amendment 72, which would increase the
state tax on cigarettes, and Proposition 106, which would make assisted
death legal under some circumstances. These topics will only be voted
on in the state of Colorado and can only change statewide government
policies.
Since 1996, about 40% of ballots have been approved, and 60% have
been rejected within the state. In order for an initiative or ballot measure
to get on the ballot, the petitioner that has created the new initiative must
obtain 98,492 valid signatures.
Although the presidential election is the highlight of this election
season, Colorado ballot measures may have a more direct impact on local
communities.
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 9
Election 2016: Special Edition
What Is The Electoral College?
by Tucker Hamilton
The Electoral College is the complex and often misunderstood
system that is tasked with the momentous decision of voting for future
presidents. It is perhaps ironic that such an integral institution in the
American government is so seldom comprehended by the constituents
who will submit their votes come Nov. 8.
Fundamentally, the Electoral College is a body of 538 representatives
called “Electors” who are evenly distributed among the states based on
population density. The number of Electors may seem arbitrary, but it
is actually the sum of all the Senators and Representatives from United
States, plus three Electors from the District of Columbia. In essence, the
idea behind this Electoral College is to ensure that an educated class of
citizens casts informed votes for whom they believe should be President
of the United States.
To win a presidential election, a candidate needs to amass 270 votes
at a minimum. If this number is not achieved by any candidate, the vote
for President goes to the House of Representatives. Therefore, the votes
of these 538 delegates actually determine the victor of our Presidential
election. Some voters have expressed discontent with this system as
being undemocratic, but keep in mind that these Electors vote according
to the popular vote in their districts.
Electors are initially selected by specific state level political parties,
which further complicates the process. These nominees are usually loyal,
respected, or otherwise citizens who have served their political party over
a long period of time. The mechanisms differ state to state, but generally,
the Elector selection process is outside of the control of regular citizens
who do not hold membership or a position of power in a political party.
The end result is that every candidate has his or her own slate of
Electors that hypothetically have pledged to vote for that said candidate.
Quizzically, 21 U.S. states have no legally binding writ for Electors to
vote for the same candidate as the popular vote in their districts. But
fear not. Under Colorado Law CRS §1-4-304, voting according to the
popular vote is mandatory.
After Electors have been chosen, eligible voters cast their ballots on
Nov. 8. According to the tallies, the candidate who wins the popular vote
in an individual state is awarded the sum total of all the Electors votes in
that state. This is where the process becomes convoluted.
As opposed to directly voting for the candidate, the voter has actually
chosen the Electors of a specific political party to serve as the Electors of
that state. Thus, the common misperception that a voter is deciding his
or her Presidential candidate is actually false. The Electors who represent
the victorious political party, however, are allowed to cast their votes.
The losing party cannot cast any vote.
The Electors often vote in accordance with their political affiliation,
which almost always corresponds to how the majority voted. However,
in Maine and Nebraska, electoral votes are awarded based on districts,
allowing both candidates to win some portion of the electorate. This
policy constitutes an indirect democracy, in which denizens of the U.S.
cast ballots for Electors whom they want to vote on their behalf, with the
assurance that those Electors will vote the way constituents have asked.
For all intents and purposes, the Electoral College is an antiquated,
but mostly harmless, institution. While there is much speculation that the
Electoral College lacks accountability or the direct democracy that many
American voters desire, it essentially has no substantive impact on who
becomes President. The will of the people is still expressed. The largest
difference between the Electoral College and a national popular vote is
that, in the Electoral College, the states and D.C. cast 51 separate votes,
while in a popular vote, the populace directly votes.
No matter what, Kent Denver students preparing to vote this year can
be assured that their vote will be meaningful, regardless of what concerns
they may have about the Electoral College. Moreover, Colorado is a
swing state, so Kent Denver’s oldest students ought to know that their
ballot will actually have a lasting impact on American politics.
Countries Consider Election From Afar
by Hannah Hayes
Every four years, the world looks toward the U.S. in anticipation for the decision
Americans will make this year on Nov. 8, a
decision that will impact the entire globe.
Many are concerned that the next President of the United States will have a substantial effect on the international world, as well
as his or her own country. Here’s a look at
how a few other countries view this election.
Mexico. Mexico is not thrilled at the
prospect of Trump as President. By this time,
everyone knows about Trump’s plans to
build a wall and his less than warm demeanor
toward Mexican Americans. Clinton’s immigration reform plan would encourage people
who are already in the United States to apply
for legal status and work permits. It is easy
to see why Mexico favors the Democratic
nominee over the Republican nominee.
Israel. One question is running through
the minds of the Israeli people: will the
United States break its vow to protect this nation? Many Israeli politicians could distrust
the American government after it signed the
nuclear agreement with Iran, for it may have
inadvertently strengthened its enemy. Israel
wants confirmation from the United States
that it will uphold its security agreements.
Russia. Russia seems to support Trump
as the next President of the United States.
Vladimir Putin’s dislike for the United States
has been fueled by our response to his annexation of Crimea and military violence
in Ukraine. Trump has gained favor from
the Russian President, because he believes
that Putin has a “very strong control over
his country.” On the other hand, Clinton believes that she would be tougher on Russia
and “confine, contain, [and] deter Russian
aggression and beyond.”
Page 10, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
United Kingdom. Our mother nation is
watching the election with rapt attention and
a bit of trepidation. No matter who is elected,
the United States will not sever its ties with
this great ally. Many British officials believe
that the United States should have a more active role in foreign affairs.
France. France faces its own Presidential
election in 2017. Maud Sullivan, a French
teacher at Kent Denver who grew up in
France, said: “There are so many similarities
[with the United States’ political process],
obviously with immigration, which is a huge
concern.” In addition, she noted: “Political
people (like Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton) play the media, and our candidates do
the same thing.”
Each nation has opinions on who should
be the next President of the United States.
Time will tell who is pleased with the result.
Election 2016: Special Edition
Advocate Editorial: Can Journalism Survive?
“Our job [as journalists] is to share with our audiences what we
know,” wrote respected New York Times columnist Nicolas Kristof last
month. He continued: “We owe it to our audiences to signal that most of
us have never met a national candidate as ill-informed, deceptive or evasive as [Donald] Trump.” Kristof’s piece, titled “How to Cover a Charlatan Like Trump,” argued that the media should take steps to discredit the
controversial Republican Presidential nominee.
The intent of this editorial is not to endorse a candidate or a party,
but rather to respectfully disagree with Mr. Kristof. Journalists should
never allow their opinions to cloud what they write. Journalists, with the
exception of opinion columnists like Mr. Kristof, have a moral obligation
to report the truth.
A reporter must be impartial. He or she must seek and give equal
weight to multiple perspectives. If a journalist, for example, were to
publish an accusation against someone, he or she would first solicit a
response from the accused. Regardless if that party would confirm, deny,
or refuse to comment on the allegation, the reporter would have upheld
a fundamental tenet of journalism. The same holds true for the media’s
coverage of the Presidential election. As invested citizens, we should
expect the media to publish unbiased coverage.
Of course, journalists hold the right to publish criticism of the candidates, so long as interviewees, not the journalists themselves, provide the
criticism, or the content is clearly labeled opinion, as Mr. Kristof’s piece
was. When the journalist becomes the critic, though, he or she compro-
mises the integrity of his or her work.
In the same piece, Mr. Kristof cites an American Press Institute study
that concluded only six percent of Americans place great confidence in
the media. Perhaps Americans have rejected news organizations because
too many journalists have forsaken their own integrity, trading principle
for “talking head” celebrity status. To rebuild public confidence, journalists must embrace, not avoid or flout, their obligation to impartiality.
Mr. Kristof claims that the unorthodoxy of this Presidential election warrants temporary unorthodoxy in journalistic practices. However,
to compromise a cornerstone of journalism under any circumstances is
inexcusable. If the individual journalist deems this election unorthodox,
does that give him or her the authority to report the events however he or
she would like? What is to stop him or her from labeling the next election, or the one after that, as “unorthodox”? Extrapolate Mr. Kristof’s
argument, and we see that it would ruin the very values that make journalism worthwhile.
Ironically, the loss of impartiality would hammer the final nail in
the coffin of the viability of professional journalism. Print journalism
is in sharp decline. Newspapers face the great challenge of adapting to
the digital age, an age when social media, blogging, video streams, and
tweets far outpace conventional news outlets. Newspapers are adrift in
this sea of self-created, self-reported, unverifiable material. If they are to
survive in our society, they must do themselves a favor. They must serve
the public good before serving themselves.
Modernizing The Bill Of Rights
The Bill of Rights
is a hallowed and sacred document. To
many, it represents
the core of the democratic institutions that
make America such
a desireable place to
live. Indeed, the legal
protections afforded
Tucker Hamilton by the Amendments
Commentary
attached to the Bill
of Rights were and
still are, to some degree, unprecedented in our
world. But despite the lofty mythos surrounding the mysterious Bill of Rights, there exists
substantial controversy over the interpretation
of certain amendments, namely the 2nd and
4th Amendments.
The 2nd Amendment assures the right
for citizens to bear arms and maintain a well
regulated militia, while the 4th Amendment
prohibits searches and seizures of property
without probable cause. Many soon-to-be voters from Kent Denver’s student body agreed
that there are latent issues with the language in
these amendments and that the rapidly aging
Bill of Rights is in need of minor modernizations. Their responses raise the concern that
for the modern era, there is an inherent need
not just to update the Bill of Rights, but also to
substantially review and consider new amendments.
The current Bill of Rights has aged well,
due to the flexibility in its literature. However,
a smattering of Kent Denver students affirmed
that they believe the 2nd Amendment should
be either repealed or heavily edited. While
the range of opinions on this amendment was
varied, the average response was that students
felt the right is too broad in its scope of applications. Questions arose concerning what is
meant by “maintaining a militia,” and whether
the valid types of weapons encompassed within the amendment should be on par with what
the federal government supplies to its military.
In response to students’ proposals, I would
argue that the 2nd Amendment is effectually
an extension of all the other rights provided
in the Bill of Rights. It dissuades the government from taking too many liberties from the
people. The common retort to this argument is:
“You would never be able to stand up to the
military prowess of our government!” While
this may be true, it is also true that the threat
of internal struggle would be unpopular with
the executive administration, and the U.S. government would eventually calculate that it has
bigger fish to fry.
In contrast, I am in slight agreement with
the Kent Denver students who said, in the
interest of preventing vigilante justice, that a
well-funded police department assumes the obligations of a militia, but with the order of the
law behind them. Therefore, I implore students
to sincerely evaluate the necessity for the 2nd
Amendment, but also understand that portions
of it may be antiquated. If any change should
be made to the Constitution, it should be an
expanded right to privacy. With National Security Administration dragnet surveillance and
drones that can comb the skies with no need
for warrants and cell phone taps, the seemingly
innocuous surveillance on the American public
has undoubtedly invaded the personal data of
every citizen at one point or another.
The Patriot Act and, more recently, the
Freedom Act of 2015, have perpetuated the
rights of the government and its agencies to
collect data recklessly. No such legislation exists to defend the common person. There needs
to be provisions for data property in our list of
rights, or else every citizen may soon find that
bank accounts, digital photos, and personal
conversations are made public without their
consent.
Of course, this is a worst case scenario, but
it could inhibit other rights, such as those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment (free speech and
press). If you do not feel comfortable sharing
your views because you are being watched,
then your rights have been unequivocally infringed.
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 11
Election 2016: Special Edition
In light of the recent third and final
Presidential debate,
I would like to express my opinion on
the current state of
the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. The
clear candidate for
our President this
November is Hillary
Sydney Gart
Clinton. As the wise
Commentary
and knowledgeable
President Obama said,
“There has never been a man or a woman more
qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as the
next U.S. president.”
Not only is Clinton incredibly knowledgeable about international affairs, but her economic policies are spot on, too. She has broken
gender barriers, advocates for human rights
(especially when it comes to women and children), and has majorly dedicated her adult life
to helping this country reduce sexism in our
society. If elected President, Secretary Clinton
would fight for the importance of universal
health care, end the epidemic of gun violence,
and improve our education systems ... because
she knows that education is the key to preparing children for the future. Secretary Clinton
wants to lower college debt, and she would
reduce the national unemployment rate while
raising our GDP. Hillary Clinton has an extensive knowledge of how government functions,
and that is exactly why she needs to become
our next President. We as a society cannot elect
a President whose campaign is based on hate,
and Clinton will be a positive role model for
society.
The Atlantic, a reputable and reliable
source, has endorsed the small amount of only
three Presidential candidates in history. First,
Abraham Lincoln, due to the desperate need to
#HillYes!
abolish slavery, and second, Lyndon B. Johnson, due to the importance of having a strong
President during the civil rights movement.
Now, The Atlantic has endorsed Hillary Clinton. The editors have taken note that she is by
far the most qualified candidate in history to be
running for President due to her extensive history in working for the U.S. and her knowledge
and expertise in foreign policy. The endorsement notes that her flaws have been blown out
of proportion by her opponent, and that Hillary
Clinton has the work ethic and motivation to
help solve our country’s biggest problems.
‘Hillary Clinton has the
work ethic and motivation
to help solve our country’s
biggest problems.’
The next President of the United States is
going to have a massive amount of problems to
deal with, between the ever changing Chinese,
British, and overall world economies, the giant
threat of terrorism worldwide, globalization,
technological change, and many more dangers
to our country. It is going to be up to the next
President to solve these delicate issues. During her eight years in the Senate and four years
as Secretary of State, Clinton has been wellequipped to handle each of these challenges
with grace and intelligence.
There are a few issues in which Secretary
Clinton is especially strong. First, she has
promised to defend Planned Parenthood, Roe
v. Wade, and all women’s right to make their
own healthcare decisions. Second, she will
fight for comprehensive background checks
on guns and fiercely work to reduce gun violence in America. Third, she will be sure to try
Page 12, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
to give middle-class Americans and business
owners more opportunities. In the 1970s, Clinton worked for the Children’s Defense Fund,
taking on discrimination cases. Her life’s work
has been fighting for families and children, the
underprivileged, and all Americans. This is a
woman who was elected Senior Class President of Wellesley College, graduated with honors from Yale Law School, was named one of
the 100 most powerful lawyers in America by
the National Law Journal, served eight years
as First Lady of the United States, served as a
U.S. Senator from the state of New York, and
served as the U.S. Secretary of State.
Clinton is also endorsed by some very
notable people. President Barack Obama and
Vice President Joe Biden both firmly stand
by Clinton along with former Secretary of
States Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell.
Even LeBron James, Beyonce, and Leonardo
DiCaprio support Hillary. She has fought for
some incredible causes, such as women’s
rights, combating domestic violence, and curbing infant mortality. She has championed equal
rights for LGBT Americans, supports gun control, and is pro-choice.
Finally, it is about time that a woman becomes the leader of the United States of America. Having a female President would make
great strides for achieving nationwide gender
equality and would create a strong, positive female role model for all young girls and boys.
Hillary Clinton holds fundamental political
strengths to be a wonderful president of our
country. She is the stronger political candidate.
She would be one of our nation’s best Presidents. She truly cares about the issues and believes in our nation. She is a strong believer
in democracy and is the clear choice for our
nation’s next President.
Election 2016: Special Edition
You Can’t Stump The Trump!
Right from the
start, political pundits
have thought Donald J.
Trump would not make
it. They speculated that
he would “sit the race
out” and, if not, be
forced to drop out due
to his “controversial
rhetoric” (MSNBC).
Above all, these experts
Justin Reeves believed there was no
Commentary way Mr. Trump would
secure the Republican
presidential nomination. Yet here we are.
Those against Mr. Trump claim he is a
belligerent bigot. Indeed, Mr. Trump has supplied the media with countless audacious
opinions over the past year. These unfiltered
glimpses into Mr. Trump’s mind are unprecedented in American politics. The cold, hard
truth, though, is that actions speak louder than
words. From what I can tell, America’s economy is rolling downhill. According to CNN, the
main problems are that American consumers
are not spending as much money as they used
to, and companies are not making as much
money either.
So why should any Kent Denver student
care? At this point in our lives, we are not major consumers, nor do we own businesses. We
rely on our parents for financial stability. Well,
America’s economy is important because it almost fully determines our future. All of us will
go to college. Most of us do not know exactly
what institutions we want to attend, nor what
subjects we want to major in. What will come
after college? We’ll probably want to get a job
so we can start making our own money. Good
luck with that; Newsweek reported last year
that the millennial generation “makes up about
40 percent of the unemployed in the U.S.” and
is “getting lower earnings compared with the
nation’s median income, versus people of that
age a decade ago.”
That’s right, we might not find a job out
of college, and if we do, it definitely won’t
pay as much as we hope it will. Based on the
direction the economy is going, our future is
looking bleaker every day. Personally, I think a
businessman such as Mr. Trump can definitely
bring the economy back up to where it was in
the past.
‘A businessman such as Mr.
Trump can definitely bring
the economy back up to
where it was in the past.’
Speaking of the past, let’s consider Mr.
Trump’s famous campaign slogan, “Make
America Great Again.” What exactly does it
mean? Does Mr. Trump want to bring America
back to the 1940s, when we suffered a war
unlike any other that only ended when we
dropped atomic bombs on innocent civilians?
Or, does he want to bring America back to
the 1960s, when a man with a grand dream of
peace was killed by the extreme racism prevalent in that time? Ironically, such a slogan
makes one think that America has never truly
been a great nation.
Mr. Trump does not want to bring America
back to those times. He wants to bring America’s economy back to when it was thriving after the end of World War II. He wants to bring
America’s society back to when civilians were
not randomly targeted in public massacres
committed by the mentally unstable and terrorists. He wants to bring Americans back to
when cities like Detroit were safe and full of
opportunity for their inhabitants.
Accusations of racism brought against Mr.
Trump do not stop at his slogan. Some find racism embedded within his policy of immigration. Simply put, Mr. Trump thinks legal immigration is good, and illegal immigration is
bad. He does not dislike Mexican Americans.
He does dislike illegal immigrants, though.
According to the Pew Research Center, 52% of
illegal immigrants in 2014 came from Mexico.
Mr. Trump is in favor of deporting those that
he thinks would do harm to this country, especially those involved in the drug trade. He
correctly states that in many cases, illegal immigrants “use public assistance, medical care
and schools” that they do not pay for through
taxes (The New York Times Magazine).
Is there not an alternative to deporting illegal immigrants? After all, they immigrate to
America because they seek a life where they
are able to succeed based on their ability. If
they were deported, it would take a ridiculous
amount of time — up to 23 years, according to
a USA Today report — for them to legally immigrate back into the United States. Mr. Trump
agrees legal immigration is completely flawed
in its current state. In the final presidential debate, Mr. Trump stated his desire “to speed up
the process bigly, because it’s very inefficient.”
Overall, Donald J. Trump is an ambitious
businessman who believes in the potential of
the United States of America. He is a man who
has been forced to act due to inadequate politicians pursuing their own personal interests instead of the interests of the American people.
When it comes to his opponent — whom I
have refrained from criticizing in the name of
good sportsmanship — he is the only Presidential candidate that will better the lives of not
only Kent Denver students, but also America
as a whole.
Graphic By Siena Fite
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 13
Arts & Entertainment
What’s Cool In The Upper School?
by Tatum Reece and Audrey McDonald
Do you never seem to know what the hot
new trends are? Do you want to know what
your classmates find the coolest? Don’t worry,
we’ve got you covered: you’ll never be out
of the loop, because we’ve got the scoop.
Check back every month for polls from the
entire upper school and make sure you keep an
eye out for our emails, so YOU can join the
conversation. This month’s edition is all about
everything Nov. 8. The survey was completely
anonymous, and, hopefully, that means all the
answers are true.
Welcome to Democracy! The power is in
your hands, baby!
Who do you REALLY want as your
POTUS?
1.
Lukas Drexler-Bruce 32.6%
3.
Vladimir Putin: 10.9%
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Beyonce: 22.8%
Kanye West: 10.9%
Shrek: 10.1%
Guy Fieri: 8.7%
Justin Treaubdoisefaf: 4.3%
Who Let the The Big Dog Out in the White
House? WHO, WHO, WHO, WHO?
What Dog Should be this Year’s First Dog?
1.
Lukas Drexler-Bruce: 32.2%
3.
Pug: 12.3%
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Golden Retriever: 29.7%
Lab : 9.8%
Naked Mole Rat: 7.2%
Home Sweet Home? Or Just Visiting?
Where Are You Relocating After This
Election?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Canada: 44.6%
Soviet Russia: 19.9%
Dem. Republic of the Congo: 10.1%
Mexico: 7.2%
Presidential MVP:
1.
Lukas Drexler-Bruce: 38.8%
3.
Barack Obama: 18.8%
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Abraham Lincoln: 19.6%
JFK: 10.5%
Which Pantsuit Makes Hillary Look Like
She Belongs in the Oval Office?
1.
Red: 39.5%
3.
Navy: 12.0%
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Patterned: 23.2%
Pink: 8.3%
Blue: 6.9%
Black: 5.8%
Green: 4.3%
What’s On Top of Trump’s Tower?
Trump’s Hair Looks Like What?!
1.
Corn Husk: 33.7%
3.
Guinea Pig : 25.7%
2.
4.
5.
Troll Doll: 27.5%
Parakeet: 7.6%
Hairball: 5.4%
DJ Play that Hot New Election Playlist
What Sound Track Will You Be Voting To?
3.
Anything from Shrek: 18.5%
Editors in Chief
Fahim [email protected]
Jon [email protected]
Proud to be An American - Lee
Greenwood: 4.0%
George H.W. Bush: 0.4%
Chiwawa: 1.8%
is a monthly publication of
Kent Denver School,
located at 4000 E. Quincy Ave.,
Englewood, Colorado 80110
303-770-7660
Rejects: 9.1%
Herbert Hoover: 0.7%
American Idiot - Green Day: 33.3%
Advocate
Gives You Hell - All American
George W. Bush: 2.5%
1.
The Sun Devils’
6.
Hot N Cold - Katy Perry: 11.2%
Ronald Reagan: 8.7%
Mutt: 3.3%
Rottweiler: 3.6%
5.
Bermuda Triangle: 18.1%
Who’s the Peyton Manning of the U.S.
National Political Team?
2.
4.
2.
Now for the only serious question in this
entire article: Who, if the election were
today and you all could vote, would you
ACTUALLY vote for?
1.
Hillary Clinton: 59.6%
3.
Gary Johnson: 16.1%
2.
Donald Trump: 24.3%
SOS - Rihanna: 23.9%
News Editor
Claire [email protected]
Commentary Editor
Sophia [email protected]
Features Editors
Ashley [email protected]
Isabel [email protected]
Arts and Entertainment Editors
Glennan [email protected]
Isabelle [email protected]
Page 14, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016
Sports Editors
Mallory [email protected]
Adelaide [email protected]
Photography Editors
Alie [email protected]
Caitlin [email protected]
Graphics Editor
Siena [email protected]
Faculty Advisor
Lesley [email protected]
Printer................................Southeast Denver Graphics
e
Sports
Field Hockey Dominates For State Title
by Mallory Garner and Adelaide Hanson
On Thursday, Oct. 27, the girls’ varsity field hockey team, coming
from an undefeated regular season, beat Palmer Ridge at All City Stadium to win the state title.
The match started out close, with a score of 0-0 for the first 20 minutes. The Devils received a corner because of a foul, and junior Olivia
Baglieri lined up to take the shot. She centered the ball to sophomore
Madeleine Hunt, who then tipped the ball into the goal, putting the Devils ahead 1-0.
“I was ecstatic when Madeleine made this goal,” junior team member
Claire Hutchison said. “The moment is hard to put to words. It was so
fun to have all the fans cheering us on and so exciting to have a lead.”
Five minutes after Hunt’s goal, the Devils were awarded another corner. Senior captain Shelby Schumacher scored with one clean hit, solidifying a solid lead on Palmer. At this point in the game, Kent Denver fans
went wild. Chants ranged from “K—D—S” to Dr. Chandler’s “A.” At
halftime, the Devils were up 2-0.
Photo by Caitlin Vickers
Senior Gabby Kinney hugs senior teammate Madison
Karns.
Fans ran to concessions to get plastic water bottles, in anticipation
of a Devils victory. Throughout the second half, whenever the Devils
got close to scoring, fans raised water bottles, ready to throw the water
around in celebration.
“The fans cheering really contributed to the spirit of the game,”
Hutchison said.
When the timer ran out, the Devils went wild. The fans threw their
water, soaking everything in sight. Fans stormed the field to congratulate
the team on a job well done. “The moment was unforgettable,” Hutchison said.
s
e
u
The victory was the first state title in field hockey Kent Denver has
won in five years. It was Coach Kathy James’ tenth state title in her 20
years of coaching.
Photo by Caitlin Vickers
Congratulations to Coach James and the entire team on an incredible
finish to an outstanding season.
Senior Madi Wifall and junior Olivia Baglieri run the
ball past a Palmer Ridge defender.
Make It Four: Boys’ Tennis Wins State
by Grace Hawkey and Brandon Pike
The Kent Denver boys’ tennis team competed for the state title in Pueblo Oct. 13-15.
The team dominated the tournament by winning all but one of the brackets. The boys won
the state title in the first, second and third singles positions, as well as first, second and third
doubles positions. Overall, the team placed
first collectively, outscoring the second place
team, Colorado Academy, 91 to 64.
With such an outstanding season, nine of
the 12 spots for the Class 4A All-State First
Team were given out to Kent Denver players: sophomore Coby Gold, sophomore Oliver
Greenwald, senior Niko Hereford, junior Jack
Moldenhauer, sophomore Sam Nassif, senior
Casey Ross (also named 4A State Player of
the Year), senior Nick Savignano, junior Laird
Stewart, and junior Alex Wimer.
Head coach Randy Ross was also selected
as 4A Coach of the Year.
This was the fourth year in a row that the
boys’ varsity tennis team took the state title,
setting a school record. Throughout the season,
the boys were determined to win state but also
continued to focus on other matches and the
performances of their teammates.
“This year, I felt like our team was very
close,” Hereford said. “We spent time with
each other on and off the court and were all
eager to win our fourth state title. We knew it
wouldn’t come easily but I think we all played
to our full potential and did not let the pressure
or the nerves affect our performance, especially at the state tournament.”
THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016 Page 15
The Sun Devils’ Advocate
Kent Denver School
4000 East Quincy Avenue
Englewood, CO 80110
NON-PROFIT org.
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Englewood, CO
Permit No. 818
Kent Denver Enjoys The Halloween Spirit
Photos by Alie Goldblatt
Kent Denver students dressed up for Halloween on
Friday, Oct. 28. Their costumes ranged from witches
and Dunkin’ Donuts to Han Solo and Princess Leia.
Page 16, THE SUN DEVILS’ ADVOCATE, November 2, 2016