Registration Activists


By Associate Editor Alec Dent

Everyone in the United States is glad the general election is about to be over. Finally, we won’t have to see anymore over the top campaign commercials, listen about how every candidate is going to ruin the country, or watch the nasty woman go head to head with the bad hombre in debate. But students here at UNC Chapel Hill have another reason to rejoice. Thanks to the registration period having already passed, we no longer have to worry about being pestered to register to vote! No more walking to class quickly and avoiding eye contact with activists! No more being asked five, ten, even twenty times a day if we’re registered to vote! No more inane conversations with the same three questions asked every time (1. “Are you registered to vote?” 2. “Are you registered to vote here in Chapel Hill?” 3. “Can I register you locally?”)! As someone who always answered yes to the first one and no to the next two, I am relieved to see those pesky activists go. Not only did they lack a basic understanding of manners (I was in the midst of a phone call one time, phone to my head, clearly busy, and one jumped in front of me to do his spiel), but if I’m being honest, I find it a bit wrong that so much pressure is being applied on college students, not only to vote, but to do it at their college.

We live in an apathetic society. While I absolutely believe it’s important to vote, I’m frightened at the idea of people who don’t care about or even understand politics casting a ballot. We should encourage people to vote, but more importantly we should encourage people to learn the issues before they vote. Our votes carry power, and I don’t like the idea of someone who didn’t care enough to go out of their way to register themselves voting. The registration activists on campus have always rubbed me the wrong way for this reason. If a person truly cares enough, they will register themselves. It’s really not that hard.

But I also take issue with these campus activists trying to get students to register at their university. Sure, it’s more convenient for us that way, but we’re only here four years (usually). Meaning we could elect officials that make changes to the community that we won’t even have to deal with once we leave. Is that really fair to those who actually live in the area and have a stake in the outcome of the election? Additionally, unlike back at home, the vast majority of students in Chapel Hill have no idea the issues facing the community. We don’t know the political history of the area, or the likes, dislikes, and needs of those who reside here. We don’t even know the local candidates!

Being registered to vote is important. But it’s more important to vote knowledgably. Do it back at home where you actually know the candidates, where you actually know the issues, and where you actually have a stake in the election.

North Carolina’s 9th District Senate Race


By Staff Writer Hinton Carter

North Carolina’s 9th Senate District constitutes all of New Hanover County. Current republican incumbent, Michael Lee, is facing a tough challenge this election cycle in democratic challenger Andrew Barnhill. While Senator Lee is running on a platform of his successful record and the inexperience of his opponent, Barnhill seems to be taking advantage of a politically charged climate, with promises to make significant changes to policies across North Carolina that were seen as controversial.

Senator Lee earned his bachelor’s degree from UNC – Chapel Hill in 1991, his Juris Doctorate from Wake Forest University in 1997, and has now been practicing law for 11 years. He has been a North Carolina Senator since his appointment in 2014 following Thom Goolsby’s retirement. After defeating democratic challenger Elizabeth Redenbaugh in the 2014 election, Senator Lee has seen a successful two years in the chamber, currently serving on nine standing committees, as well as successfully passing bills on job creation, education, and incentives to strengthen North Carolina’s economy.

Andrew Barnhill, the democratic party’s candidate in the race, is only 28 years old, raising questions about his experience to be able to credibly serve in one of the state’s highest elected positions. After receiving a bachelor’s degree from Furman University and a divinity degree from Duke University in 2013, Barnhill has been employed by the Eleison Group, a faith-based non-profit, the North Carolina Democratic Party, and the New Leaders Council, a progressive leadership training firm.

Large questions came into consideration after Barnhill announced his candidacy; local Wilmington news organizations first reported that Barnhill had been caught partying on a charitable, faith-based mission trip to South Africa during his college time. While on the trip with Cargo of Dreams, the nonprofit, sources reported that Barnhill was on the worksite for approximately an hour on the entire trip, spending the rest of the time at a high-end resort and casino. The director of the nonprofit, as originally stated in an interview by WNCN, stated that Barnhill was an “extreme manipulator” and stayed at the resort Sun City for most of the trip.

Time will come to show on November 8th whether voters will be able to sift through the political rhetoric and make a conscious decision who the right candidate is for office. While this race will not affect those voting on ballots in Chapel Hill or in the greater Orange County area, it is important to realize the need to be a conscientious voter and understand the track record and experience of a candidate, as well as their morals and values towards others.

**Editor’s Note: The Carolina Review Editorial Board has not endorsed any candidates in this race.

Let’s Talk About Single-Issue Voting

The 2016 Presidential Election seems to be a breeding ground for single-issue voters. The two candidates vying for the Presidency are disliked by many within their own parties, never mind the American public, at large. Many people have chosen to pick candidates based on the one issue that they most care about, regardless of the candidate’s general platform. There are many Republicans who hate Donald Trump that are voting for him based solely on his pro-life stance. Conversely, there are many Democrats who dislike Hillary Clinton, but are willing to vote for her purely because of her immigration policy. What do single-issue voters really say about the political system and the election?

There are a plethora of stances on this. Many religious groups believe that single-issue voting for pro-life issues is morally correct, while feminist groups might believe the same for pro-choice issues. Yet, shouldn’t a voter base their decision on more than a single issue? Is it really acceptable to thrust the fate of the most powerful nation on earth, of democracy itself, onto a few opinions, rather than a candidate’s total record? Are we alright with allowing this to elect a candidate who will be one of the most unpopular presidents in history the moment they are sworn in? I don’t really have a definitive answer, but I think we should seriously consider the potentially negative effects of single-issue voting. When either Trump or Clinton are elected, they will use their newfound influence to promote their entire platform. They will have the force of the majority of Americans’ votes behind them to enforce that platform. It’s likely that many Americans won’t agree with many of the things he or she will do–maybe even most of those who elected him or her won’t agree with something they do–but the numbers will lie. It will appear to the world that a majority of Americans back up that candidate’s proposals at every step. Even if polls come out showing they don’t, the President can still fall back on the undeniable fact that he or she garnered a majority of the people, with those people knowing his or her platform quite well.

What is the solution here? It seems like it would be beneficial to talk more about the issues and less about the scandals and gossip relating to either candidate. When issues are the center of a campaign, and policies are actually proposed, general opinion about things will become apparent. While this is a job for the candidates and the media, the public has a role here, too. We must demand less scandalization of politics and require real solutions to the issues we find most important. It’s time to take democracy back into our own hands and have the politicians work for us, not vice versa. Only then will America be truly great again.

October 2016: Look Who’s Whining


Dear Readers,

The Carolina Review is proud to present our October 2016 issue: Look Who’s Whining. Inside the cover, you will find a hilarious satirical foray into the minds of our friends on the left, delving into a range of issues from sports, to clowns, to the fixtures of Autumnal Aggression and oppression. This issue is available to read online here and will have a limited run of print additions available upon request. We hope you enjoy this latest rendition of the Carolina Review.

Lux et Libertas,

Francis C. Pray, III


Reflections on the University


By Jackson Valentine

In a publication such as The Carolina Review, we tend to dig into some deep issues (many of them critical of our school). The reason higher public education was created in the first place was to open up an environment where intelligent people could get together and present ideas, and with those ideas, go on to help our state and nation progress. Because of that free exchange of ideas, we at the Review enjoy the right to criticize actions taken by administrators and faculty at UNC. It’s a right and duty we hold sacred. Sometimes, however, it can be nice to simply hold the criticism and appreciate the institution that we call our home. Once per year, we show that appreciation through University Day, the anniversary of our great institution’s founding.

Since 1877, we have celebrated University Day as the day that the first brick of the first building (Old East) was laid, signifying not only the beginning of what was to be the greatest public university in America, but also the beginning of higher public education in The United States. October 12, 1793 has indeed gone down in history as the beginning of dialogue, understanding, and the desire to be “scholarly” in what was at the time a very young country. Little did we know that one building for one student would grow into the academic and athletic powerhouse that Carolina is today.

University day has traditionally been graced with the presence of dignitaries from all across the country, including most North Carolina governors, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. This year the ceremony featured the director of undergraduate enrollment Steve Farmer as well as awards for outstanding alumni and faculty. University day has also traditionally been the inauguration of new chancellors, and Carol Folt was no exception. I can still remember sitting in the UNC Wind Ensemble in front of South Building looking out at the crowd, seeing baby blue and white all around and watching our newly inaugurated chancellor deliver her first speech to the school. It was in that moment that I knew, despite all the beef I had with this university, that it was a great school full of great people. I promptly returned to my dorm room and pinned an article for the November 2013 edition of The Carolina Review about why Chancellor Folt had an agenda writhed with liberalism in the name of “tolerance and diversity”. It is precisely that reason that I believe this school is great; UNC encouraged me to question why things are the way they are, and to wonder if they could be better.

So while I’m sure everyone enjoyed taking a day off from morning classes for the ceremony last Tuesday, I encourage you to take in the beauty of this place every single day and see it for what it is: the greatest public center of learning to have ever graced the face of the earth. So, tomorrow when you’re going about your daily activities, go by the Old Well, take a look at the cornerstone of Old East, go chill by Silent Sam… and know that you go to the greatest school in the world.

The State of the Races


By Staff Writer Chris Antonello

After last week brought us the most-discussed topic of the 2016 General Election, Donald J. Trump’s chances of becoming the 45th president all but vanished. It’s hard to come back from leaked audio with crude language — just ask Richard Nixon.

I will say that Trump’s dedicated supporters will not likely move away from him after his comments about sexually abusing a married woman were leaked last week. But it doesn’t matter.

The audio has, however, sealed his fate. And the fate of the federal government.

For over a year, you have probably heard political pundits up and down the aisle say Trump has a ceiling. Trump has a ceiling.

Look at the state of Ohio. Polls show that he has the support of 84 percent of Republican voters. In contrast, Mitt Romney had the support of 94 percent of Republican voters in 2012, and he still lost the state.

And Republican voters are hardly enough to win the Electoral College, especially when there are so many more Democratic voters who turn out in droves in general-election years than Republicans. It is a well-known fact that, at least since 2006, Democrats have been better at getting out the vote (GOTV) than Republicans. It puts the GOP at a major disadvantage.

As for the down-ballot candidates, this race has gotten stickier. Republican candidates have reached an impossible situation. They have pretty much all denounced the lewd comments Trump made in 2005, but the issue of endorsements remains. If a candidate revokes his endorsement of the Republican nominee, he could appear to be abandoning the party and ceding the White House to Hillary Clinton. If he maintains his endorsement, he appears to condone the lack of morality in the political sphere.

We were all pretty sure that Trump would lose, but the leaked audio could have just cost down-ballot Republicans control of the Senate and a sizable chunk of the House.

Strap in. November 8 is less than four weeks away, and even more could be leaked.