Trump's the GOP nominee -- Now what?

By THOMAS HARTWELL

Let's talk about something very near and dear to my heart, or rather, my amygdalae -- the fear-conjuring portions of the human brain: A Trump nomination. Initially the thought of a Trump nomination gave me a sense of relief. "Well, if Trump is nominated, at least November will be triumphed by someone who, you know, isn't Trump." Now, though, I've begun to worry. Trump wasn't supposed to make it through the first couple months of a candidacy, and yet, here he is -- the GOP nominee. I've said "never" and been proven wrong in respect to Trump's campaign too many times to find any comfort in a statement that he could "never" win in November.

Not only has Trump now clinched the GOP nomination with more than the required 1,237 delegates bound to him, but several polls also show a narrowing margin between he and Hillary Clinton, a candidate who has only a slightly lower unfavorable rating than Mr. Trump. Amid an ongoing investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State and in a time of considerable public disdain and mistrust for the political establishment, Clinton's campaign seems to have more work cut out than previously thought.

Months ago, polls showed match ups in which Hillary Clinton won in landslide fashion over Donald Trump in November 2016, but those polls have recently been showing a spread within the margin of error and in some cases even with Trump edging Clinton out. "How could this possibly happen?!" I hear some of you out there shouting. Clinton supporters and Anti-Trumpsters alike neglected to take into account early on the effectiveness of Trump's personal attacks and empty promises on the masses. As expected, Trump has turned his attention solely to the presumptive Democratic nominee and begun a tirade based around a question of Clinton's character, coining a popular use for his campaign: "Crooked Hillary." There shouldn't be much surprise surrounding the narrowing of hypothetical match ups between the presumptive nominees. Polls conducted months before a general election and while other candidates remain in the race mean very little when taking into account all of the discoveries and events that could and would take place between then and an actual general election match up.

The best weapon that the Clinton campaign has left is a focus on her experience in politics and Trump's lack of experience. But even Clinton's experience in and around political office hasn't been able to save her from an unfavorable rating hovering anywhere between 50-60 percent -- she chose a bad time to be considered untrustworthy. Also, the Clinton campaign's earlier jabs at Trump's possible nomination -- "Really, folks? America's going to nominate Trump?" -- didn't resonate with anyone except the already Anti-Trump, and the "Trump's a joke" shtick can't, with any credibility, be used anymore.

Sanders is also causing the Clinton campaign some headache. While 66 percent of Sanders supporters say they would back Clinton if she were nominated, there have been reports of up to 20 percent of those "feeling the Bern" that would back Trump over Clinton. Clinton's supporters are also much more willing to support Bernie (88 percent) should he receive the nomination, prompting an even louder cry from many for a November Bernie bid (article here). But, sorry to all those out there feeling the Bern, the best possible thing that could happen to the Clinton campaign, and that could happen for the Never Trump movement, right now would be the suspension of Sanders' bid for the Democratic nomination paired with a Clinton endorsement from the Bern himself. Sanders should be careful not to alienate Clinton supporters if he really wants to defeat Trump and if he really is not going anywhere until the bitter end in July.

There have been calls for a third option, and I have to say, in a presidential campaign season that has already been filled with surprises, I think that hypothetical candidate could steal away quite a few votes, granted they distanced themselves enough from both candidates and still chose either a right or left lean.

Republican party aims to trump Trump as candidate furthers his delegate lead

By THOMAS HARTWELL

The 2016 presidential campaign has been one that has, in many ways, strayed from the normal workings of U.S. elections, with the season’s rhetoric centered around the anger and distrust of a “corrupt Washington.” While both sides have seen revolutionary political strategies and several broken ballot records, the Republican party’s election has undeniably been the more colorful of the two, and Donald Trump has captured voters’ attention. The Republican race to the general election is narrowing, and the Trump campaign seems to be rallying the needed public support to face the Democrats in November.

“The Trump phenomenon – no one saw this coming. No one really understands why it’s happening – what’s going on – but I’ve got some ideas,” said political expert Kerwin Swint.

Swint is an author, speaker and professor of political science at Kennesaw State University. He has run campaigns, written books and his work has appeared in several national and international media outlets. Swint said that the “Trump phenomenon” as well as this campaign season’s obviously splintered GOP is something that has been in the cards for a while and has the potential to have lasting effects.

“What’s going on in the Republican party is a real revolution,” said Swint. “It is serious, it is dramatic, it is significant and it’s going to have long-term consequences.”

While there are plenty of voters out there who have voiced their discontent with Trump, more surprisingly, said Swint, is the amount of resistance Trump is receiving from the, so-called, establishment Republicans. The establishment fears that a Trump nomination means a Clinton victory, but it goes beyond that.

“The other part of their thinking … is, ‘Good Lord, he might win,’ which might be worse,” said Swint. “President Trump would pay no attention or very little attention to the establishment.”

Swint also said that a number of Republicans would rather see Clinton win the general election than Trump – a party line-crossing that has not been seen in decades.

Trump has appealed, most abundantly, to white, blue-collar workers who are tired of Washington and who are willing to cross party lines to vote an “outsider” into the Oval Office. His ability to pick up Independent votes has given him an edge in the delegate count, said Swint, but the damage that he and others have been doing to the GOP this season has forced some voters to display their unhappiness in other ways.

Zac Carr, a 25-year-old Cobb County voter said his primary vote was cast as a symbol of his own unhappiness with the candidates this campaign season.

“I voted for Rand Paul despite the fact that he is no longer running,” said Carr. “I asked for a non-partisan ballet because I, like George Washington, believe that the two-party system only polarizes our country. I wanted to do my part by showing that I believe non-partisan is preferred over Republican or Democrat.”

Carr said that the “nastiness” in the Republican race forced his hand and initiated his Independent vote.

Lott Middlemas, a Florida voter and international relations and Chinese double major at the University of South Carolina, agreed that the GOP race has been ugly, but said that its dirty tactics might be good for the number of voters in a general election.

“I think that voter turnout on both sides will increase noticeably for both parties as a result of the inflammatory politics of the Republican party during this election cycle,” said Middlemas. “The Republicans have been talking for years about expanding their base of support by appealing to minorities, but I don't think they'll see that as being necessary anymore since they've managed to draw out many more white voters than usual without having to soften their stances on economic and social issues that are often important to minority voters.”

The Democrats, said Middlemas, will turnout in larger numbers simply because of their fear of a Trump presidency and Clinton, he said, will beat Trump handily.

Not so fast, says Swint. A Clinton win isn’t such a sure-fire thing in a head-to-head.

“There are people assuming that Trump wouldn’t have a chance in a general election against Hillary Clinton. I’m not necessarily in agreement with that,” he said. “One of the strengths of Trump is that he’s put together a pretty broad coalition … It’s certainly not a slam dunk [for Clinton].”

It is his ability to appeal to groups of varying demographics and political opinion that potentially makes Trump dangerous, said Swint.

Yet another scenario in the Republican race is a nomination by a convention. Trump leads by about 100 delegates with 460, but he does have to get through a still very present Ted Cruz, and some wonder if the other Republican candidates may be able to pull enough delegates away from Trump to prevent his receiving a majority (1,237 delegates) and force the party to the convention. In this scenario, said Swint, the Republican leadership runs the risk, should they nominate someone other than Trump, of losing grip on their party.

“I think if they do take it away from [Trump] at the convention, I think he absolutely will run independent,” said Swint. “And I think at that point, he would be real interested in just wrecking the party for the Republicans.”

A non-Trump convention nominee would not only anger Republican voters, said Swint, but it would also cause “wheeling and dealing” between presidential candidates, state governments and others – precisely the kind of Washington antics voters are tired of.

According to Middlemas, though, Republican voters don’t need to worry about a convention.

“Super Tuesday cemented Donald Trump's supremacy in this race,” he said. “Sen. Cruz might be able to win a few more states, but Trump will certainly have a majority of delegates by the time the Republican national convention rolls around.”

Whether or not Trump has solidified his nomination remains to be seen, but polls with only Trump and Clinton’s name on them have begun to show up. Current CNN polls show either Democrat defeating Trump in November, but November is still miles down the road, said Swint.

“The general election [polls] right now are meaningless,” said Swint. “The election’s months and months away. We’re going to have coalitions, we’re going to have world events, we’re going to have economic developments that are going to affect that.”

All we can do now, said Swint, is wait and watch.

Lessons along the campaign trail

By THOMAS HARTWELL

I am so incredibly excited to be in journalism, and my number one priority and my hope is that it shows while I'm on the job and in my finished product. As I've participated in gathering information and in reporting on the campaign trail, I have learned lessons, and sured-up others.

Bernie Sanders speaks at campaign rally at Morehouse College
in Atlanta, Tuesday, February 16. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

First lesson: the devil is in the details. I've learned this the hard way previously. The campaign events and news stories that I have covered have allowed me to build off of the mistakes that I've made. Accuracy is everything in journalism, and so is integrity -- accurate quotes and assurance of permission are paramount. During interviews, I write times of reference for good quotes, passionate answers, jokes, etc. on my recordings. I also have interviewees write their names and contact information on a notepad as well as record those elements on tape. For absolute assurance of friendly relations and a happy interviewee, I have made a habit of emailing soon after the interview thanking them and requesting a response which, in writing, displays my ability to use their photos, names etc. in my stories or blog posts (I have an archive full).

A man who preferred to be called "St. Nick" and his friend,
who preferred anonymity at the Morehouse College
 Bernie Sanders event, Tuesday, February 16.
Photo by Thomas Hartwell

On that same note, a lesson that I've learned throughout my life, but that has been reinforced in work: don't take people and your interactions with them for granted. I love nothing more than meeting new people, asking them about the things they love or hot-button issues and participating in a sort of dialogue. Journalism allows for a relationship to develop very quickly and last between interviewer and interviewee -- it also provides opportunities for relationships to go South quickly, but we'll put that to the side for now. These relationships with both the people interviewed and people you simply run into have the potential to impact you in the moment and benefit you down the road.

"Look like you know what you're doing and nobody asks any questions." This is a lesson that I learned early and that I apply often. Check out the story.

It is becoming increasingly clear to me how exciting my career will be and how small the world of journalism really is. I have had an absolute blast on the trail with my colleagues, and I know that the excitement of, "You got that interview?" and "There's a great angle for a shot over there" will continue and manifest itself in important professional relationships in coming months and years. 

Gabriel Ramos stands atop the media platform at the
Morehouse College Bernie Sanders event, Tuesday,
February 16. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

Whether or not my colleagues become competition in the future doesn't matter -- we'll all be working toward a commons goal: reliable, accurate and dependable reporting that, among other things, keeps the general public informed and the elites accountable. Final lesson: don't take your colleagues for granted -- your competition might just turn out to be your saving grace in the end.

Bernie Sanders and the people of the Morehouse rally

By THOMAS HARTWELL

I'm a fairly new journalist. I haven't had the experiences that many seasoned field reporters have. I don't have stories and I don't have a crazy interview history. I'm emerging -- budding, if you will -- so covering a presidential campaign event, really covering it, was exhilarating. I can tell that I'm in the right line of work and that Tuesday night was the beginning of my own stories.

More than 4,800 gather to hear Sanders speak at
 Morehouse College, Tuesday. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

Bernie Sanders came to Morehouse College, Tuesday, and so did thousands of supporters. I arrived at 4:30, the event was set to start at 7, and began hunting for parking -- a challenge in the area. It wasn't that there weren't spots available or that there was already overwhelming traffic, but I didn't want to pay at a meter or embarrass myself with an attempt at parallel parking. I asked a couple police officers as I was driving to and fro, but received only a, "We don't know where the event is," before I could even roll my window all the way down. "Well, what about parking?" I said. "Don't know that either," they said. I eventually found a deck at Morehouse School of Medicine and talked a rather friendly parking attendant into letting me "borrow" a reserved spot for a few hours, which probably really meant "park illegally and pay me $5." 

Shortly after getting out of my car, I noticed three women parading down the sidewalk in the direction of Morehouse's main campus, the eldest of the group sporting a tie-dye skirt and matching headband. Rosie Trimmer, as I was introduced to her, was garbed in what I can only describe as "hippie attire" to match her headband and skirt -- a description, I gathered, she would take as a compliment -- and she carried a homemade Bernie sign. The sign read, "4 generations + 4 women + 4 ever + 4 Bernie = '16' election. Vote with your soul!" I took a picture of the trio, wished them well, and took a moment to stand there and think through the night's do's and don'ts, letting my eyes blur before realizing I had no idea where I was supposed to go. Rosie and her group hadn't gotten far, though, and since I assumed they'd know where they were headed, I followed their lead. 

Rosie Trimmer (left), April Gaffney and Tybee Trimmer (right)
support Sanders with signs and attire. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

Turns out, I parked MILES from Morehouse's Forbes Arena, where the rally was to be held, and when I finally got to the check-in line, it too was miles long (it wasn't literally miles, but without exaggeration, it probably stretched 3/4 of a mile). I stood in line for about 20 minutes until volunteers began walking along the sidewalk registering people via their smartphones. I showed them a press pass I had been provided by Kennesaw State University College of Communication and Media, and they sent me to the media entrance. I approached the media check-in table reluctantly -- I was only a lowly student journalist, and I was getting involved with hotshots from the Times, CNN and others. But working from the foundation of a piece of wisdom I have received from many throughout the years, "Look like you know what you're doing and no one asks any questions," I strutted up, gave them my name and said, "I'm with KSU News." I got in. My name was not on the press list, I was added and I was given a Bernie Sanders press pass.

Alexander Meyer, Morehouse College sophomore, prepares for
 Sanders' speech. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

I interviewed students of Morehouse College, local high school students and a 93-year-old Bernie supporter. The atmosphere was electrifying, Sanders' surrogates and his own speech were intense and passionate, but the rhetoric did not excite me as much as the people of the event. The people I talked to were, for the most part well-informed, excited and just as passionate as the candidate they backed. My experience showed me I'm in the right line of work. Being surrounded by thousands of people, snapping pictures left and right, just being amid the chaos gives me energy for my future in journalism.

If you want a hard news story for this event, check it out here.

Sanders arrives at Morehouse College, rallies diverse audience of thousands

By THOMAS HARTWELL

Bernie Sanders speaks to nearly 5,000 at Morehouse College, Tuesday. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

ATLANTA – Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders paid a visit to Morehouse College, Tuesday, drawing a millennial-dominated crowd of nearly 5,000.

Sanders has run a campaign on a foundation of racial, ethnic and socio-economic equality in the 2016 presidential race. His speeches often revolve around the control of wealth in America and the discrepancy in the ownership of that wealth. The rhetoric at the Morehouse rally did not stray from that, and Sanders received energetic support from the audience.

 “We need an economy for all of us,” said Sanders. “Not just the 1 percent.”

Sanders also spoke to his growth in popularity and polls over the course of the 2016 presidential campaign. He cited several states where he either won or is winning according to polls and what those numbers looked like at the beginning of the campaign season, namely in Iowa and New Hampshire.

“We started in Georgia way way way down,” said Sanders. “And you know what? I think we’re going to win right here.”

Several surrogates also spoke on Sanders’ behalf, including rapper and Morehouse alumnus, Killer Mike, who gave an impassioned speech on Sanders’ stance on racial equality. After speaking, Killer Mike, whose real name is Michael Render, spoke candidly about the difference in Clinton and Sanders’ equality policies.

Rapper "Killer Mike" speaks on behalf of Bernie Sanders in preparation for Sanders' speech. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

 “Bernie Sanders’ policy advances everyone now. Hillary Clinton’s policy is, ‘Hold up and wait,’” said Render. “Bernie Sanders takes donations of $30 from working-class folks. Hillary Clinton takes millions of dollars from special interests. Bernie Sanders is interested in restoring regulations that will help us all, Hillary Clinton is interested in co-oping and doing more corporate things that are harmful for the worker class.”

Millennial rally attendees energized the atmosphere and said they felt as if Sanders’ policies recognized and valued the needs of young or less fortunate subcultures of voters, such as college students and ethnic minorities, and focused on a government “for the people.”

“Bernie is the only candidate that’s really supported primarily by the people,” said Morehouse College sophomore, Alexander Meyer. “He’s the candidate that has the most integrity, he’s the most progressive candidate, the candidate that actually wants forward change in our country without either keeping a status quo or launching us backwards into regression, and that’s why I support Bernie Sanders.”

Sanders has steadily gained popularity over the course of the 2016 presidential campaign, surprising many, both with his closing poll gaps on Hillary Clinton and, as especially noted in Iowa, with his ability to mobilize and excite a young voter audience.

“I think it’s important for young people to get involved, because this is going to be their future,” said 16-year-old Sanders supporter, Caragan Thiel.

Caragan Thiel and her mother, Tonya Thiel, brandish their Bernie buttons in wait for the
beginning of the Atlanta rally. Photo by Thomas Hartwell

Even though she and others her age will not be able to vote in the 2016 election, Thiel said they should still be paying close attention.

 “Legislative policy that’s passed right now and foreign policy and things that go on in this country that happen now are going to affect us later,” said Thiel.

While Sanders is considered by many the owner of the millennial vote, he rallied the support of voters young and old under Morehouse’s Forbes Arena lights – some voters older than others. 93-year-old Charlene Coburn dismissed the idea that Sanders and older voters don’t see eye to eye.

“I’m for the good of the people – whoever can do and change some of the things we need corrected now,” said Coburn. “Experience is another factor. Sanders has been in the federal avenue, he seems to be a rather level-headed person, and he wants to improve and do better for everyone concerned. We need someone who is sincere, who can walk the walk and talk the talk.”

Sanders’ visit to Morehouse College comes before an important two weeks for presidential hopefuls. He moves to Nevada in coming days ahead of Saturday’s caucuses, according to his campaign’s Facebook schedule, and is expected to campaign heavily in South Carolina soon after.

Who won the debate? Dem edition

By THOMAS HARTWELL

The Democratic debate on Feb. 11 was an exciting one. The decidedly less divided and less aggressive Democratic candidates agreed on most topics, but had very different rhetoric and solutions. Unlike in the year's Republican debates, a lack of outright shouting at each other and with only a couple candidates on stage, Hillary and Bernie had plenty of time to talk through the issues.

BERNIE
Bernie did well at the debate Thursday, opening with the issues he has highlighted as the most pressing domestically: Social and racial inequality, financial stability, healthcare for all and, of course, Wall Street speculation.

Sanders had a few well-liked quotes and strong statements that might be especially important since the next stop is South Carolina -- a state almost decided by the black vote. In discussion of police and community relations, a topic that has proved especially hot-button for many in light of the many unarmed black men killed by police lately, Bernie called for the "demilitarization of local police departments" as well as a diversification of those departments to ensure that they "look like the community they are serving." His focus on race inequality continued with an answer to his critics' one-issue candidate attack. The economy that he wants to create, he said, "which is already paid for" by his "tax Wall Street speculation" is for those who are less fortunate financially, which is why he continues and will continue to address it. It would "keep children off of street corners." His strongest racial inequality statement, though, came when he compared the amount of white versus black people who have been jailed for marijuana use. The use between the races is almost equal, he said, but the incarceration rate is 4 times higher for blacks. He was smart to include this statement going into a very important primary.

Sanders also came out strong on immigration. He received roaring audience support after saying that the U.S. people must "stand up to the Trumps of the world who are trying to divide us up." Sanders supported Obama's use of executive orders on the issue, but said he would go even further -- a statement that also received roaring support. (It was at this point that I think Hillary tried to grab a little of that support by throwing in a little "me too"-type statement). A path to citizenship, said Bernie, is essential to bringing families and citizens together, not dividing them up.

Bernie didn't impress on foreign policy, again. He doesn't seem incredibly bothered by the critics on this issue, though. He allowed that Russia and Syria should be taken seriously, but sort of pushed them to the side saying, for example, that the U.S. should try to make nice with Putin, but not let him "get away" with anything. Also, his stage presence still is not that of Hillary Clinton who, for example, has experience debating on these kinds of fronts. A strong and impassioned overall performance, but a performance poked full of holes by Clinton. 8/10.

HILLARY
Hillary struck a few blows to Bernie's campaign efforts and debate performances, trying to shake the foundation on which he has built his rapidly growing campaign. She spoke first about the numbers not adding up in reference to Bernie's economic, education and healthcare plans. While she agreed with several of the ideas, she accused Bernie of having little foresight experience enough to speak with any ethos on the subject. Clinton gave the audience a call to action on the two varying economic plans: "Vet both of our proposals."

Hillary's proposals seemed more prepared and actionable than Bernie's, and she certainly got into the nitty-gritty of those topics, which did well for her. Both Sanders and Clinton put a price tag on a couple of their ideas (both $100 billion), but Clinton challenged Sanders on the gathering of his proposed funds. Sanders' ideas pivot of governors making monetary commitments that he suggests, and "I'm not convinced" that would happen, said Clinton.

Where Bernie lacked, Clinton was strong as well -- foreign policy. Hillary's ability to expand from years of experience as well as her own interest particularly in foreign policy allowed for an expansion beyond what Sanders could offer. She spoke eloquently on domestic terrorism, ISIS, online defense and local, state and federal law enforcement. There were times, however, that debate viewers' eyes may have glazed over. It's important in a debate to back up claims, but going too far into detail or focusing on one topic for too long has the potential to lose attention from viewers. Clinton's expansion also may have been taken as "show-offy" at times.

I think where Hillary lacked was in her attempts to cast off doubts of trust in her. The 'Yeah, I have Super PACs, but the majority of my donors are small' message she brought prompted my answer: "The majority are small donors, because 2 people gave you millions." She also seemed to repeat words that had come out of Sander's mouth seconds before -- a tactic that seemed acceptable to audience members, but didn't get past me. Stronger policy speech paired with a more confident stage presence won Hillary this debate. 9/10.

The New Hampshire effect

From New Hampshire public radio

By THOMAS HARTWELL

More records were broken Tuesday when the presidential candidates made their way to New Hampshire. While the Democrat's voter record was not broken, they contributed to the overall high voter turnout of 538,094, edging out the 2008 total voter turnout by around 11,000 ballots cast. The Republican voter turnout shattered previous records; 284, 120 voters cast ballots -- an increase of nearly 12,000 on the Republican side alone over the previous record-setting election (248,475).

There were a number of surprises in New Hampshire. Most shocking to me was Kasich's taking second place and receiving almost 16 percent of the Republican vote. Kasich came off of a debate performance where he looked more comfortable than previously and, apparently, where he impressed potential voters. I was surprised to see this large of a jump in his numbers, even while refusing to use negative ads against the other candidates -- a tactic which has proven very successful in New Hampshire in the past. Kasich needed this revitalization to his campaign after a not-so-strong debate performance on January 28 and a sheer beat down in the Iowa caucuses.

The amount of votes that Trump received was staggering to me, too. I knew going in that he was likely to win New Hampshire, as up to 34 percent of New Hampshire voters register as Independent and are, therefore, more likely to vote away from the "politician choices." What I was not prepared for was Trump's capturing of more than a third of New Hampshire (35 percent). Trump received 10 delegates to the next nearest candidate's four, so it was quite a victory for him... *sigh*

More surprises: Rubio dropped into fifth place, below Bush, who previously received only 3 percent of the vote in Iowa. Bush, like Kasich, desperately needed this attention from voters, but unlike Kasich, has remained extremely positive about his campaign -- easy to do when you have the amount of financial support he does, I guess. Rubio hasn't been doing so hot lately. He's been called "robotic" and "too rehearsed" after, in a couple cases, he has repeated almost exactly the same words several times in speeches. Rubio said it himself, he didn't do well when it mattered leading up to New Hampshire. Cruz did well to fly under the radar and focus his energy on South Carolina, amid some accusations of illegal campaign activity, taking third. I expect him to win there, as he has captured the evangelical vote for the most part. Christie and Fiorina did not receive enough support to justify continuing their campaigns, and as expected suspended them in the following days. If Carson has another performance like that of the 2 percent he earned in New Hampshire, he could be next.

In short, the Republicans' race could turn into a 2-person one. If Cruz does as well as many expect in South Carolina, he and the Trumpster could simply be too far out in front to catch.

As far as the Democratic vote goes... well, what'd I tell you? Bernie received a whopping 60 percent of the vote to Hillary's 38. This is due, mostly, to the state's large number of Independents (Bernie is registered Independent as a Vermont senator). Bernie received 15 delegates to Hillary's 9, but the two are tied going forward, as six out of eight of the "super delegates" have declared for Clinton. I expect that, in South Carolina, Sanders will not be able to overcome the large discrepancy in the African-American vote and will lose, potentially big, to Clinton.

Campaign narratives and candidate success

By THOMAS HARTWELL

A narrative not only makes for a more interesting story and, in turn, campaign season, but also can win a candidate a state, or even a general election. There have been more than a few surprising narratives driving the candidates' campaigns already this season, and I'm sure you wouldn't be surprised to hear me say that I will, again, be mentioning the Trump (I'm sorry, but as one of my professors once said, "He's the gift that keeps on giving"). The other not-so-surprising choice for a narrative-rich campaigner, I think, is easily Sanders.

I'll start with Trump and just get it out of the way.

Trump has capitalized on two things: fear and frustration with Washington. Trump has been unapologetically blunt, crass and, at times, down-right rude. He can get away with this, and even continue to climb in the polls, because his narrative is that he is new -- he's a successful business man, not a politician, and he swears to use his hard bargaining, his CEO know-how and his tell-it-like-it-is-edness to bring his enemy to their knees and to "Make America great again." How, you ask? "Well, first things first, let's get me elected." People go for that. Partly because of Trump's story telling -- "I'm a successful business man who, like you, is fed up with Washington" -- and partly because his followers just want to see what his specific plans are finally.

Sanders tells a similar story of being fed up, but his story is a little more history and policy-based. Sanders tells us that he has been in politics since the '70s, building trust with listeners. He, like Trump, acknowledges the calls for change, but addresses the change with more specific answers that might be harder for some followers to process than a general, "It's gonna be HUGE." His largest success, though has been embodying the "little guy" who takes on the enormous establishment that is lobby groups and Super PACs. Distrust of cookie-cutter politicians makes Washington the antagonist in both of these candidates' cases and, of course, makes themselves the protagonist.

See the Bern: A quick visual analysis of the Sanders campaign

From the Bernie Sanders campaign Facebook page

By THOMAS HARTWELL

The Bernie Sanders campaign has been something that I have been closely following both as a necessity for classes and for my own personal curiosity and desire. I have been analyzing the campaigns of many presidential candidates and found a couple, namely Sanders and Trump, to be the most intriguing.

Bernie Sanders has been considered a “revolution” campaigner and is turning the policy of most prior democratic candidates on its head. I remembered this particular ad because when I hear the term “revolution” in reference to the Sanders campaign, I now think of this visual. A few things in particular come to mind when I look at this ad and other ads like this one:

First, the use of the text reading, “Roll up your sleeves…” paired with the visual of Sanders actually rolling up his sleeves is, I suppose, to send a “working man” message to potential viewers and supporters. This, paired with the continued use of his buzz word, “revolution,” has won him quite a bit of public recognition, despite the initial negatively-connotated “Sanders is a self-proclaimed socialist” ads (they sort of died when his policies started to pick up a follower base). So his, originally socialist, now “for the people” campaign has been dependent on his “roll up your sleeves,” “it’s us, not me,” “political revolution” campaign.

Second, everything in this ad looks so clean and straight and organized – down to the pens in Sanders’ pocket. I mean, look at them. Yes, it might seem that his wearing a suit would contradict his claim of being a “working man” who is going to “roll up his sleeves” and get down and dirty, but I have to believe that any viewer of a presidential campaign ad would expect this attire from a candidate no matter what the ad actually said (it could say, “Look at me, I’m not wearing a suit.” And he’d probably still be wearing a suit). I think the “clean” look for his ads attempts to speak to his: 1. Trustworthiness and 2. Simplicity. His trustworthiness in part because he seems organized, like he has his stuff together, and his simplicity because, again, he is working with the image of an “everyday guy,” “us, not me” campaign.

Finally, the use of Sanders’ first name on his ads continues his down-to-earth and personable feel. He seems to aim to be approachable with a sort of “please, call me Bernie” message.

[It is worth mentioning that Sanders’ hair has become a staple as well. Yes, his hair. It has become a signature in many of his ads (you can’t see it as well in this one, so I’ve included another example below). I feel that finding something unique or quirky in a public figure can make them more personable and real – I don’t just feel that way myself, but I’ve observed it in others as well.]