The SSU website seems to be moving in the right direction. The implementation of the new Lobo chat feature, department spotlights, and animated GIFs of students on campus are slowly bringing the website to life, but much work still needs to be done.

For many Sonoma State students and billions of people around the world, 2020 can’t end soon enough. This year has put everyone through an unprecedented stress test, and the true extent of the damage inflicted as a result of the combination of lockdowns, illness, fires, quarantines and economic disruptions remains to be seen.

We have experienced a rollercoaster of a year, a world-class competition of corruption and craziness that paraded as an election cycle, and a financial landscape that can only be described as ludicrous and illogical, as record stock market highs are manifest as if by magic, even though restaurants, bars and entertainment venues have been shuttered for months, and it is impossible to forecast trends in the midst of tumultuous regulations and obstructions to the free market. Everyone knows someone that has been impacted by the shutdowns of major industries, as millions have been laid off and lives have been upended across the globe.

Through all of this turmoil and upheaval, students are left with the worst end of the deal. Opportunities to earn money are few and far between, and service industry jobs like bartending and waiting tables, that are typically the best paying options for students, are now a thing of the past.

Tuition prices for online courses at four-year universities leave many students feeling cheated, and to those of us paying full price for a fraction of the amenities, it honestly feels like we paid for first-class tickets yet were seated in the baggage compartment of the plane. Sure, we will receive our degrees and “reach our destination,” but we’re not enjoying the immense offerings that come with interacting with diverse classmates, professors, deans and university staff. After spending months wrangling with virtual instruction after SSU went online in March as a result of the Coronavirus, it is now clear to students that Zoom and Canvas courses can never take the place of in-person instruction.

Sitting at home in pajamas and meeting through an online platform is not a college experience. Taking social distancing to such an extreme is damaging in the long run, as social interaction and learning the intricacies of developing working relationships diplomatically is a skill that can only be learned through practice.

Those graduating in 2020 are missing out on the hard-earned honor of walking across the stage in front of family and friends and celebrating their achievements with fellow graduates.

First-year students are unable to enjoy some of the most important rites of higher education. Campus activities and the ability to socialize and fraternize are an integral aspect of college life. Students need and thrive on the opportunity to work and party together, and the ability to relieve stress through much-deserved celebrations is an integral and vital part of university life, and the absence of these social events is disappointing and detrimental to our existence.

These in-person interactions can not be understated in their value to students’ well-being. Some are looking for long-term love, while others are looking to have fun and/or hook up at parties and pub crawls, and it doesn’t matter what you’re looking for, it’s the act of looking and enjoying others’ company that makes life fun and exciting. Taking these experiences away from young adults is cruel and unusual punishment.

We are loving, social beings that build communities out of both desire and need, and the more we are driven apart by fear, ignorance and politics, the less healthy we are as a whole. In this time of extreme polarization and irrational fear, we must recognize that we are weaker when divided, and we must overcome our fears and reunite in order to overcome our obstacles. It is through the power of unity that our community can reach our full potential. We work best when we can look each other in the eye, communicate fully with facial expressions uninhibited by masks, and develop physical, emotional, and spiritual connections that allow us to better understand ourselves and the world around us.

While the Coronavirus numbers may appear to be scary, as the media has their magic machine on full blast right now hyping mass fear and hysteria, it is important to remember that we have existed as civilizations for millennia, through the worst outbreaks with much less health care technologies than we currently possess. Humans are remarkably resilient creatures, and from a statistical standpoint there is absolutely no reason for society to be reacting with a sense of panic that causes more harm than the virus itself.

If any good comes out of this god-forsaken year, may it be that society gains the mental acuity to see what is happening on a geopolitical level. At this point, everything should be questioned, and nothing should be assumed. If people are willing to take their newly found 20/20 vision and apply it to the bigger picture, critical thinkers will find it easy to see that the same actors benefit from most military ventures and crisis situations like the one we are currently enduring. By examining the means, motive and opportunity of any crime, one can follow the money and find the culprit. It is through education and awareness that the current cycles and vile nature of the status quo is defeated, as evil and ignorance are like cockroaches; when the light of knowledge shines, they flee back into hiding.

It is by coming together that we can overcome any challenge, no matter how insurmountable it may first appear. Divided, we are guaranteed to fail. It is easy to feel overwhelmed by the sheer insanity of the current situation, but present in the midst of this chaos are immense opportunities for leaders to step forward and offer progressive ideas and plans that benefit society and offer inclusive paths that create a sustainable future. Now is the time for benevolent, compassionate leaders to come forward and challenge the fallacies that lie at the root of inequality.

While the transition of power is currently stalled amid legal wrangling, Status Quo Joe is wasting no time in living up to his moniker, and ensuring very little real progress will be made, with the recent selection of Richard Stengel as a leader in the administration’s “U.S. Agency on Global Media.”

Stengel is a former editor for Time Magazine, and his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, in which he argues in defense of propaganda, has gone viral after being featured on Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now program on Fri. Nov. 13.

Stengel told the CFR, “My old job at the State Department was what people used to joke as the chief propagandist job. … I’m not against propaganda. Every country does it, and they have to do it to their own population. And I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.”

The statement is a ridiculous notion to all that believe in a decent, democratic society, and all that have read William Cooper’s book, “Behold a Pale Horse,” will find it highly ironic that Stengel made this highly authoritarian statement while surrounded by his ilk in the octopus-like political powerhouse Council on Foreign Relations.

The appointment of Stengel is especially concerning given the fact that the Obama/Biden Administration repealed the Smith-Mundt act in 2012. This piece of legislation from 1948 served to protect the American people from the propaganda efforts of the Department of Defense and the American government.

The Obama/Biden Administration essentially made it legal for the government to lie to its own people, and now Biden has appointed an individual that well fits the intelligence agency formula, and believes in propagandizing the people, to a position that oversees media policy. This is an unconscionable act that indicates an intention to lie to the public, and any objective observer would find it difficult to argue that this is a benign or coincidental appointment.

Stengel is also on the record opposing free speech. In an op-ed published in the Washington Post that raises serious questions, he wrote, ““All speech is not equal. And where truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails.”

In addition to Stengel, a number of media professionals are leaving their positions to join the Biden Administration. MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade is now on Biden’s legal review team, and the network’s health expert, Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, is joining Biden’s Coronavirus task force. The implications are astounding. Media executives and operatives are incentivised to provide coverage that favors one candidate or the other, in hope or in recognition that their favors will be repaid.

Combine these facts with what is known as Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s attempt to influence the public by placing assets in high-level media positions, and you have a media environment that serves authoritarian interests while subjugating the citizenry.

While the agency likes to decline involvement with the secretive operation known as Mockingbird, publicly available Senate Intelligence Committee records from 1996 are titled, “CIA’s Use of Journalists and Clergy in Intelligence Operations,” and it is well known that intelligence agencies have numerous operatives working at various media organizations. William Colby, former director of the CIA, famously said, “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”

A fellow CIA director, William Casey, said, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

And now the upcoming administration is preparing to shield itself with master manipulators and seasoned veterans of the disinformation industry. These are extremely dangerous times, with power being usurped at all levels in the name of national security and the health of the people.

It is easy to become focused on an individual, such as Trump, as the source of problems, but when the issues transcend administrations and continue to affect quality of life, there is clearly a deeper source of the trouble, and if we are to overcome the obstacles facing us, it will take a non-partisan approach that is capable of recognizing alternative courses of action and accepting responsibility for decisions made in the past.

While it is understandable that people feel a sense of relief that a new administration will be taking power, it is imperative that critical analysis of the agendas and actions of both parties be thorough and objective. War crimes, inequality, lies and propaganda should never be tolerated from our elected officials, regardless of their party ties. We do not have to settle for the lesser of two evils, instead we must demand democratic leadership that respects civil liberties.

For those in the United States, this has been what feels like the longest week of the year, eagerly waiting for the final votes to be counted to elect the new president of the United States. After a whirlwind year, the people knew just how important this upcoming election would be, and that showed with the millions of ballots collected and counted. With the interesting prior debates from President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, it became clear that this was not going to be a normal election.

As the week of Nov. 2 unfolded, many mail-in ballots and poll voting were handled, and the race for 270 electoral votes was on its way. Due to the ongoing pandemic, mall-in ballots grew in popularity for those that were uncomfortable or unable to attend an in-person voting poll. With this new normal of mail-in voting, as some would also call absentee voting, some controversy grew about how this may be voter fraud. Voter fraud, being illegal rigging of votes, can consist of many voter crimes. As more absentee ballots and states’ final vote totals became available to the public, Donald Trump began to be quite vocal on his views about voter fraud and even demands of a recount.

As the week progressed, this election became the story of every conversation. Citizens in and outside the U.S. sat aimlessly through election streaming channels watching numbers go up, for both Trump and Biden. But as the people of the free world waited patiently for votes to flood in, Trump was more interested in the mail-in voting process, as more of those votes placed favor on Biden. On Nov. 4, Trump went ahead and tweeted, “They are finding Biden votes all over place” and, “So bad for our Country,” blaming certain states for supporting Biden. Of course, this is not the first time Trump has used Twitter as his own personal diary, and most of his tweets have been shielded with a description labeling “content in this Tweet is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process,” which comes as no surprise.

Both Trump and Biden went on air to discuss this ongoing election, with Biden reminding the people that “all votes must be counted” and to “keep the faith,” and Trump going on to explain that he will be the winner and again, believing the fraud of mail-in voting. However, the election was not over, and the states including Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia were still counting their final votes. These, and the other swing states became a big topic of discussion, and even the surrounding theme to many internet jokes and memes. Many citizens used platforms like Instagram and TikTok to joke about the slower vote count process with these swing states, almost pushing away the anxiety and realization of the grave importance of how these states will vote.

As the electoral votes became more clear to the people, it seemed to push in favor of Joe Biden, which Trump did not take lightly, including tweeting “STOP THE COUNT” on Nov. 5. Biden however did not claim any victory just yet, as the awaited swing states were still on their way within the counting process. During this time Trump expressed his passion on voter fraud, stating that the recent Biden claimed states “will be legally challenged by us for voter fraud and state election fraud,” refusing to accept defeat in these swing states. Would Trump go up for debate if he had won these states? It seems as if Trump may be taking these election results a bit too personally, instead of stating where the alleged voter fraud have occurred.

After many state results, eager citizens, and the big swing states beginning to pull in their vote, the projected 46th president of the United States was announced as Joe Biden on Nov. 7, and his ally Kamala Harris, being the first African American and first woman to take the spot of Vice President. This victory to the Democratic Party became loud all across the U.S., and even in other countries. One being the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who tweeted his congratulations to Biden and Harris as well as stating, “London looks forward to working with you – it’s time to get back to building bridges, not walls.” Outroar of positive protest and rallies for Biden were shown all around the U.S., even including citizens outside the White House telling Trump his time is up

While the window of opportunity for Trump is narrowing exponentially, Republican leaders are encouraging him to continue battling, and if he finds a way to overcome his current predicament through litigation, chaos in the streets will be inevitabe..

During this time however, Trump was seen at his golf course, unable to speak about the results of this election to the public. Once Trump began to come back into the limelight, he bluntly stated that he actually won the election “by a lot,” and blamed the media for calling who the next president will be. Trump may be taking legal action during this time against voter fraud in Biden winning states, but the ending votes were not as close as Trump may think, and Biden certainly secured the lead for the next president-elect in the end. So now the question is what will happen next,? Will Trump find full voter fraud against Biden that could overthrow his candidacy? Or should Trump simply accept his defeat and pass the torch to the next president of the U.S.?

Voting: a civil duty? Harm reduction? A democracy or democratic republic? The United States electoral college for the American presidency, created by a group of old, elitist, white men to prevent the majority's tyranny and amplify smaller states' voices, may make Americans feel like their vote is worthless. Nevertheless, in states where there is a historical tendency to favor one party over another, it is. And this is significantly worse in populous states like California, where the American's voting power is roughly 3.5 times weaker than the voting power in Wyoming. However, despite the nuances and complexities of the electoral college system, voting is crucial for congressional, state, and local elections -- and in swing states, the presidential elections are of most importance and significance.

Voting was not always a right granted under the Constitution. Various social movements across history attempted to establish voting as a right granted to all. During the Reconstruction Era, there was ratification and passing of the 15th amendment (right to vote despite race). De jure, African Americans who were forced into slavery were given the right to vote, but de facto, Jim Crow laws prevented them from doing so. The highly glorified Women's suffrage movement was a step in the right direction, but that only allowed white women to vote and was essentially an element of the growing movement of white feminism (women of color were not able to vote until decades after). It was not until the Civil Rights Movement that racial disenfranchisement and government-sanctioned discrimination became de jure illegal, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 passed.

Moreover, even in modern America, we see stark voter suppression in predominantly Black areas where they are likely to wait longer than voters in white neighborhoods. Some may see voting now as support for, and extension of, the activism where many civilians fought decade-long battles in order to grant us the right to vote. It is what voting does to ensure policies like the Voting Rights Act pass, though there should not have been voter disenfranchisement in the first place. Although there is still a lot of progress to be made to ensure that equity is seen across the nation, especially when it comes to voting rights, it is crucial that those who have the opportunity and the privilege to do so.

These bodies of government create and pass legislation and ensure the cooperation and compatibility between the private sector and the public. In many cases, local and state governments matter even more. Amidst the pandemic, some governors and mayors across America, despite it being a national crisis, tried to contain the virus while others did not take the same safety measures. To those who did, their efforts proved the effectiveness of voting in non-federal elections and local governments’ legitimacy. They played the leading role between the virus and the health and safety of its citizens. For instance, San Francisco Mayor London Breed adopted medical experts' recommendations to shut down the city early and enforce physical distancing. As a result, according to reports published by the New York Times, which track the patterns and latest case counts of COVID-19, San Francisco has one of the lowest death rates and infection rates per capita, compared to North Dakota, where the entire state has reached an infection rate of almost 6,000 per 100,000 residents as of November 1st, 2020.

As the corporate media loves to highlight midterm and general elections to stir up polarization within America, it may be surprising to know that elections happen every year at the local level. Voter turnout tends to be lower because there is much less coverage on these local elections than we get exposed to when the presidential elections arrive. The lack of coverage and marketing for local elections is potentially dangerous as there may not be an active governing body to represent their constituents accurately. In many ways, local governments affect citizens more than the presidential election. For instance, the federal minimum wage remains at an irrefutably, poverty-creating $7.25 per hour. However, cities across America implemented their own minimum wage. According to the Department of Labor for New York City, the state falls at a minimum wage of $15 per hour, while the county and city of San Francisco is $16.07 per hour and changes each year according to inflation. As minimum wage levels fall into the laps of local elected officials' responsibilities, this reinforces the importance of voting, especially locally, as elected officials affect everyone everywhere.

Talk to those friends who "stay out of politics" or do not care about voting. Now is the time to convince those friends who usually stay out of politics or pay no attention to the ever-lasting changes that affect us as a whole. By talking to your friends about voting, you can help increase broader civic engagement. Topics like the minimum wage alone help low-income households pay for their necessities and gives college students a higher chance of being able to afford an education. If those same friends do not like any of the candidates, they still have the opportunity to vote for policies and propositions as their votes can still directly impact the issues they care about. Voting matters, even in the toxic bipartisan system and in the absence of the sought-after popular vote for presidential elections. These elected officials enact policy that could help give social and economic mobility to marginalized groups.

With the upcoming presidential election only a week away, this past Thursday marked the last presidential debate of the season. Spectators were thankful for a much less chaotic affair than the first debate, due to the newly implemented ability to mute one nominee while the other spoke. To be fair, there was a hefty dose of personal attacks between the two candidates, but overall, viewers were able to get a sense of the major policy differences between the two, and their stance on important issues.

Of particular importance to many viewers was the corruption scandal that plagues former vice president Joe Biden. President Trump implored Biden to come clean with the American people about the revelation that his son, Hunter, and brother, Jim, are involved in financial dealings with foreign corporations that benefit the family to the tune of millions of dollars annually. Biden’s non-response and obfuscation of the facts only raises red flags to those inclined to follow the money, and the media is once again illustrating their complicity in covering up high-level financial crimes that bring the integrity of our political system into question.

One heavily debated topic was how each candidate would handle the Coronavirus pandemic in the coming months. Trump and Biden could not have discussed more contrasting plans. Biden claimed that America is headed for a “dark winter” unless we cultivate a better plan for handling the virus. He said that if he were elected, he would establish national standards for reopening schools and businesses, and he would provide appropriate funding for this to happen. He also wants to invest in rapid and frequent Coronavirus testing throughout the country, particularly in virus “hotspots.”

Trump, on the other hand, claimed that a vaccine will be arriving “within weeks,” and that the country is “rounding the corner” of the disease. This is a striking remark, considering that the country has seen a recent spike in cases and the midwest has seen record-breaking numbers of cases in the past few days. Trump claims that lockdowns have caused more harm than good, and that the country should reopen. “We’re learning to live with it,” Trump said. “We have no choice.”

There was a stark contrast between the candidate’s plans for health care in the future, but both candidates support the morally bankrupt insurance industry at all costs. Trump bragged about his success in passing legislation to eliminate the requirement of health care under the Affordable Care Act. Trump said, “I’d like to terminate Obamacare, [and] come up with a brand new, beautiful health care.”

Biden, meanwhile, advocated for “Bidencare,” and described it as “Obamacare with the public option.” It will cost a lot--specifically around $750 billion--but, “Bidencare” will supposedly protect people with preexisting conditions, lower insurance premiums, reduce drug prices, and end unexpected medical billing. Trump responded by calling his plan “socialized medicine,” but Biden pushed back against this, saying that he supports private insurance. He also mentioned, somewhat off-hand, that he beat Bernie and his other rivals because he disagreed with them about health care. Biden is struggling to gather support from Sanders’ loyalists, and the former vice president is caught between the progressive wing of his party and moderate members that prefer the status quo on a variety of topics.

To the chagrin of his handlers, Biden allowed Trump to drag him into a debate on energy, and Biden’s acknowledgement that his administration would transition away from oil shocked the President and the moderator, as Kristen Welker responded with, “Why would you do that?” Biden’s response that he would do away with oil because it is an industry that causes pollution is a winning stance for environmentalists, but from a strategic standpoint, this admission was a monumental gaffe that could cost him much needed support in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas.

There was also an argument about raising the federal minimum wage rate. Biden wants to fight for $15 an hour, because “...anything below that puts you below the poverty level,” he said. Trump believes this issue should be left to the individual states to decide. “Some places, $15 is not so bad. In other places, other states, $15 is ruins,” Trump said.

The debate took an interesting and notable turn when the topic of immigration was discussed. Biden rarely ever criticizes the Obama administration, but he did so repeatedly on Thursday night. While attacked for doing nothing to solve the problems while in office for 47 years, including eight in the White House, Biden said he was not the president at the time, essentially throwing Obama under the bus and insinuating that Obama was responsible for their administration’s failures.

When Trump asked about deportations and family detention during the Obama administration, Biden responded by saying, “[The Obama Administration] made a mistake. It took too long to get it right.” But, he hopes to counteract this mistake by proposing new immigration legislation within the first 100 days of office--if he were to be elected. The new legislation would provide a pathway to citizenship for roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants who are already living in the country. He also said he will immediately recertify people protected under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program--a program that Trump has repeatedly fought to end.

Trump responded to questions about immigration by describing the American border as a “strong border,” with hundreds of miles of new barriers, and tougher imigration and enforcement policies. When the moderator, Kristen Welker, asked Trump what his administration is doing to reunite the 500 children who were lost at I.C.E imigration camps with their parents, he responded: “We’re trying very hard.” He didn’t outline any specifics of what they were doing, which left many viewers questioning the authenticity of this statement and feeling unsatisfied with his answer.

It is also important to note the candidates’ responses to climate change. Biden called climate change an “existential threat to humanity,” and said that he would push the nation towards more renewable sources of energy, such as solar and wind. He claimed this would create jobs and boost the economy, as well.

In response to the issue of climate change, Trump responded with one of the most outright false statements that we have heard in the past four years of his presidency. He claimed that his administration has done “an incredible job environmentally.” Seconds later though, he criticized renewable energy sources, claiming that windmills are too expensive and kill birds. The Trump Administration has already reversed nearly 100 environmental rules, pulled America out of the Paris Climate Accord, and Trump himself has claimed that climate change is a hoax. In short, he is not benefitting our environment.

It would be partisan not to mention the other blatantly false statement from Trump during the last presidential debate. Trump claimed, “I am the least racist person in this room.” Biden scoffed at this remark, as well as hundreds of viewers at home. The President is decidedly unpopular with the Black electorate. In September, Gallup reported that Trump’s job approval rating among Black Americans hovers at 11%. According to a January Washington Post poll, more than 8-in-10 black Americans believe that Trump is a racist.

In just the two debates alone, Trump has made three notably racist remarks. Firstly, the president refused to condemn the violence of far-right and white supremacist groups during Black Lives Matter protests this summer, when moderator Chris Wallace, of Fox News, repeatedly asked him to. Secondly, Trump questioned whether Biden would have won the Democratic nomination if senator Elizabeth Warren had not dropped out of the race, and called her “Pocahontas” while doing so. And lastly, he once again referred to the coronavirus pandemic as the “China plague.”

President Trump seems to be running out of time to mount a comeback, and Biden has a hefty lead in national and state polls. As of Oct. 26, Biden is favored to win the election. Forecasts say that Trump has a one in six chance of winning the election. 53% of the popular vote belongs to Biden, while 45% belongs to Trump. While this may seem hopeful for those looking for change, polls in 2016 were very similar, and the electoral college race is extraordinarily tight.

Thankfully, the debates are over. The presidential nominees will find out on Nov. 3 whether they have been elected to lead our country in turmoil out of the trenches of the Coronavirus pandemic, the rising poverty rate, and the systematic racism that affects much of the American population.