By Andrew Morales ’19

On Tuesday November 8th 2016, after 16 months of careful deliberations pertaining to the overall wellbeing of the United States, I decided to cast my vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence. This decision was by no means simple and required a great deal of moral and theoretical rigor. Although I lean ideologically right and identify as a conservative Republican, I find Donald Trump to be an absolute train wreck of a man and an imbecile at best. One might ask why I would ever cast my vote for a man who disregarded sexual assault as “locker room talk”, or voice support for someone who told the world that the United States would pull out of NATO unless other countries met their financial obligations to the organization. My answer would be: electing Hillary Clinton to the highest office in the land would mean the end of our republic as we know it.

Although Hillary Clinton is regarded as a “champion for the rights of women” and the “most qualified candidate” when compared to a reality TV star (our nation has very high standards as you can see), she has shown herself to be above the law. Just a few days after Loretta Lynch — Attorney General of the United States held a covert meeting aboard a plane with former President Clinton which was hours after Mrs. Clinton announced that she wanted Lynch to remain in her administration. Only moments after President Barack Obama announced that he would campaign for former Secretary Clinton and flew her down to North Carolina on Air Force One (while she was still under FBI investigation mind you); the director of the FBI James Comey announced that although Secretary Clinton had unmistakably engaged in criminal behavior that fits the criteria explicitly stated under 18 USC §793, 18 USC §1924, 18 USC §798, and 18 USC §2071, she would not be prosecuted.

Under an autocratic banana republic where the rule of law is irrelevant and persona is the sole dictator of the transfer of power this would be permissible – however, we live in the United States of America. Here is what the FBI director had to say on the matter:

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent.


The kind of intent James Comey is referring to does not apply in this case. Although previous cases have focused on the willful transmission of classified material to others, this is absolutely not what the rule of law is or should be. The rule of law states that laws are as they are written, and they must be applied equally across the board. Seemingly, the rule of law does not apply to Queen Hillary nor will it ever. Americans on both sides of the political spectrum should be outraged by this ostensible display of corruption.

Notwithstanding the ludicrous standards and law revisions for former Secretary Clinton, I also used my vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence to prominently display a massive, pulsating middle finger to the intolerant intelligentsia of the American left. Upon entrance into the world of leftist academia, I found my viewpoints to be far from the norm, discounted, repudiated, and even demonized. The categorization of conservative lines of thought as microagressions is deeply troubling to me.

I was brought up as a Mexican-American conservative believing that the American Dream is possible for those who are willing to persevere in their respective field. This view was not only discounted but categorized as a microagression in addition to the widely held belief that America is not a melting pot – but rather a salad because saying that America is a melting pot is now a microaggression. This is the sort of rhetoric that mirrors that of conservatives and for intelligentsia to label it as damaging to the rest of society is polarizing and divisive. Americans often wonder why conservatives are intimidated and afraid to express their viewpoints on college campuses; this would help to clarify that rationale.

To be labeled as a hater of Mexicans, antagonist of women, and bigot in regards to LBGTQ+ folks without any evidence not only demonizes conservatives who value the rule of law to be upheld in America above other values, but it also develops rifts within communities and divides us as a nation. We as a people must come together and not spread hate in any way, shape, or form.

On the contrary, I fully sympathize for those who chose to vote for the Democratic ticket ticket last Tuesday. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are both deeply flawed candidates who are unfit and unqualified for the most powerful office in the world. While Hillary Clinton has remained above the law, Donald Trump boasts about groping women without their consent. What this election really comes down to is the values that you hold dearest to yourself. As a young, aspiring woman who has high hopes of becoming a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, do you really want a president who treats members of your gender as mere objects as opposed to a person with absolute value? To the marginalized white voters who feel cheated by the Washington elites and globalism within the rustbelt states (Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan); would a candidate who labeled your people as deeply racist and irredeemable “deplorables” really be the best representation of your values?

Marginalization and demonization not only lead to factions, but they disrupt the very harmony that we as Americans worked so hard to achieve. Let us all remember that at the end of the day we are Americans: the ones who are the shining city on a hill. Rancor and violence on both sides should not tolerated and be censured to the fullest extent. I hope and pray that we can finally come together as one united people under God and close the rifts that divide us so. Only then will we remain the dominant force in the world whose creed is manifested by the statement: life, liberty, and justice for all.