Power Can Be Intoxicating, but Simmens is Sober

Back in May, Lance Simmens, a political activist and an author on political issues, published an article on Huffington Post, From Hope to Hate. The article compares Richard Nixon, the 37th U.S. president who is best remembered as the only president ever to resign from office, and Donald Trump, the 45th and current President of the United States who has been in office since January 20, 2017.

The article does not start off as another boring, political piece. It does not contain many complicated terminologies that I usually encounter when I try to comprehend political articles/news meant for adults or political maniacs. The author’s intended audience could be people of all ages and political views, since he does not put anyone or any party down. The author also kept the article interesting and fun to read by using amusing terms such as intellectual giant and Hater-In-Chief.

In terms of credibility, the author’s words are quite to be trusted. Simmens has served in senior level positions in government, politics and public policy over a career that spanned four decades. He has also worked with two U.S. Presidents, two U.S. Senators, two Governors, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the U.S. Senate Budget Committee, and been active in local government and community issues. He did claim without providing any evidence that Richard Nixon was a crook. However, his basis for that is a well-known fact that had profoundly affected many in his generation and undoubtedly the country as well, therefore stating the evidence is not necessary. Everything Simmens wrote about President Trump in this article seems to be true so far we’ve seen after his nine months in office, such as: “Power can be intoxicating and Trump is consumed by it. His inability to control his tweet addiction, lack of self-discipline to refrain from straying off script, temperamental disorder. . . “ (Simmens).

Kris Kobach and His Inaccurate Accusations

    The article in the New York Times written by their editorial board is on the subject of the presidential election back in 2016. Last year Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire, a competitive state that leans democratic, by 0.3% points. The Kansas Secretary of State and Vice Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Election Integrity, Kris Kobach, claimed that there was voter fraud in the New Hampshire election, in his latest column for Breitbart.

      The article has a misleading title, for starters. When reading the article, I realized that the title does not represent the content well. Or rather, the author phrased it wrong. As a muggle who doesn’t even know who Kris Kobach is, the title “Kris Kobach and His 5,313 Fraudulent Voters” gives off a negative vibe towards Mr. Kobach. Whereas the article is essentially criticizing the circumstantial evidence that Mr. Kobach offers in his post, it is not about his having 5,313 illegal voters. In fact, he doesn’t have an army of a few thousand illegal voters like it initially came across to be. What he did do was make irresponsible accusations against New Hampshire regarding the illicit votes that had allegedly happened.

     With the purpose being convincing the readers to doubt Mr. Kobach and his accusations, the article also presents the hidden details that Mr. Kobach had omitted when trying to expose the fraudulent New Hampshirite voters. “New Hampshire law does not require people to be residents to register and vote. They must only be domiciled in the state, meaning that New Hampshire is where they currently live and spend most of their time – a description that applies to college students. In 2016, the towns with the highest rates of voters who registered using out-of-state IDs were all home to college campuses” (New York Times). By giving those statements, the readers are informed about what Mr. Kobach had left out from his “evidence” after inaccurate readings of the state law and data.