W ith the midterms coming up, Republicans have an important question to ask themselves: Am I ok with President Donald Trump becoming the next Ronald Reagan? Reagan reshaped the Republican Party’s policies, strategies and style for generations to come. Trump is on course to do the same. This should be a scary thought for everyone, especially Republicans. Trump enjoys a 93 percent approval rating among voters who identify as strongly Republican. Yet many of Trump’s strongest critics in the Republican Party have left office, including 40 Republicans in Congress. The Republican primaries have been a success for Trump, with 35 of the 37 Republicans Trump endorsed victorious in their respective elections. The Republican National Committee is run by a former Trump campaign chief and has been shaped in Trump’s image. Once the source of ideas and policy initiatives, the RNC, in pure Trump style, now has a website called LyinComey.com, which has the sole purpose to attack James Comey, former director of the FBI. Polls of Republicans show Trump is changing minds in the party base. Once settled issues in the court of Republican opinion, tariffs and Vladimir Putin’s role in the world are now becoming increasingly positively acceptedby Republicans. The hope that Trump would be shaped more by the establishment of the party than vice-versa is dead. You might be thinking Trump should be considered a conservative president because he’s passed some conservative policies. But he’s too inconsistent. He passes tax cuts while embarking on a quixotic protectionist mission against China. He increases military spending while undermining the alliance system that has been the hallmark of U.S. security policy since the end of World War II. He supports Israel, but also anti- Semites. Trump is inconsistent because he doesn’t have any normative or moral compass. His only guidance seems to come from considerations of power. The organizing principle of his trade policy is that we win and our trade partners lose. He has no problem attacking the media, institutions, individuals or even his own cabinet members if he thinks it makes him look good. For Trump, major decisions are a calculation of power rather than principle. He’s a drunk man’s Niccolò Machiavelli. Trump’s singular obsession with power is what makes him fundamentally different than past modern conservatives. Trump’s view of American exceptionalism is devoid of values. Reagan’s brand of conservatism saw America as a beacon for freedom on the global stage and a city on a hill for anyone who sought freedom and opportunity. Domestically, the party under Reagan promoted smaller, more efficient government and a free market, which included free trade, as to avoid hindering individual ambition and innovation. But I’m not arguing the Republican Party or its values were perfect before Trump. There’s a reason Republicans have long struggled to capture minority votes. Illiberal populism that deals in racism, sexism and homophobia has existed on the right to different degrees since the Civil Rights Act. But the Republican Party has had some grand moments. I can name a few: taking a decisive stance against the Soviet Union, granting amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants, rigorously upholding a liberal international order which promotes human rights and freedom and promoting free trade around the world. Even if you strongly oppose these traditionally conservative values, it’s still beneficial for everyone that the Republican Party has values to which it can be held accountable. It’s important for political parties to run on values or ideas with policies that are as consistent as possible. When they don’t, elections tend to descend from a clash of ideas to a clash of tribal and cultural loyalties. Such a clash of tribal loyalties will only make our polarized political system more fragmented. Today, the Republican Party is being reshaped. It’s being reshaped to care only that America is strong and that its enemies—which are an ever-growing list of countries, institutions and people—are weak. It’s a party that terrorizes migrant children by placing them in detention centers and tries to deport even those who have known no home but America. It’s a party that is cutting the number of legal immigrants because it believes people from certain backgrounds have less to contribute. It’s a party that doesn’t believe in free trade. And who cares if dictatorships and illiberal regimes spread across the world? They want strong friends, not morally upstanding ones. To Trump’s Republican Party, defending American exceptionalism means upholding sovereignty, borders and brute strength rather than upholding freedom, global prosperity and human rights. Trump’s view of America is unexceptional. It mirrors the way strongmen around the world view their countries. The midterms are a referendum on Trump’s politics. A defeat of Trump’s candidates could awaken the establishment and the base of the party. Republicans should thus vote Democratic or not vote at all. The fact is that Trump’s politics are not a stable foundation to base the future of the party. Millennials will outnumber baby boomers by 2019, and Trump and his policies are very unpopular among millennials. Trump relies on nativist sentiment that speaks to a white-majority nation. Before 2050, white Americans will not be a majority. Even now, despite Trump’s attack on immigrants and our immigration system, most Americans see immigration positively. Former State Secretary Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million while being a very unpopular candidate during the 2016 election. What happens when the Democrats find a charismatic candidate again? Many Republicans likely support Trump and his views because they think he’s better than any Democrat would be. But such dialectical thinking has limits. What does Trump have to do for that not to be true? Start a trade war that will cost consumers and could actually ruin Christmas? He’s already done that. If you’re a Republican reading this, the next time people are outraged at Trump, please think about what our president has actually done. Ask yourself, “Would I be okay with Obama or Bush doing this?” Only then can the Republican Party reshape itself again, taking the best of its previous foundations and better adapting to the 21st century. Opinion The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com 4A — Thursday, September 27, 2018 Emma Chang Ben Charlson Joel Danilewitz Samantha Goldstein Emily Huhman Tara Jayaram Jeremy Kaplan Lucas Maiman Magdalena Mihaylova Ellery Rosenzweig Jason Rowland Anu Roy-Chaudhury Alex Satola Ali Safawi Ashley Zhang Sam Weinberger DAYTON HARE Managing Editor 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. ALEXA ST. JOHN Editor in Chief ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND ASHLEY ZHANG Editorial Page Editors Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS ELLERY ROSENZWEIG | COLUMN Hey, I’m a fat person S ifting through the sales rack, I could hear her laughing closely behind me as she organized the clothing on hangers. When I asked for a dressing room, she looked at the yellow jumpsuit in my hand and gave me an awkward smile. Staring at myself in the mirror, I pulled the jumpsuit up my legs and over my butt, noticing a small hole. The jumpsuit was cute but a little too tight, so I decided to return it to the front counter. As I waited for my friends to finish changing, I spent some time looking at the jewelry. There, I overheard the saleswoman ask her manager, “What am I supposed to do with this big hole?” She looked at me and laughed again. I quickly looked down at the earrings, trying my best to ignore her. My friends finished paying and we continued shopping down State Street. Later that day, laying on my bed, staring at the ceiling, I could not stop thinking about the interaction with this saleswoman. She made me feel like there was something wrong with me and brought back thoughts of insecurity I had been fighting for so long. I was angry she had the power to make me feel bad. But then it came to me: She’s just afraid. She is scared of being fat. It made me feel bad for her. As someone who identifies as being a fat, curvy, tall person, I have been fighting my internalized fatphobia for as long as I can remember. I spent so much time trying to be smaller because believed if I was smaller, I would be happy and love myself. But the truth is no diet, workout plan or change in weight has ever made me happier than when I stopped fighting and started accepting myself. My mindset did not change all at once, but over time I have had a fundamental shift in the way I see my body and the other bodies around me. Last year, my roommate showed me a YouTube channel called StyleLikeU in which a mother and daughter interviewed different models, artists and activists about their styles and accepting their bodies while they stripped down to their underwear. After watching so many of these videos, I was in awe of how vulnerable the participants were about sharing their stories and bodies. I started searching for more videos of activists like StyleLikeU hosts Iskra Lawrence and Barbie Ferreira and followed their Instagram accounts. They led me to a greater community of body-positive activists who were using media platforms to combat diet culture and fatphobia by uplifting each other with bodies that challenge the mainstream ideals of beauty. With this whole new ideology in mind and the support of an online community, I began talking to my friends who look and feel the way I do about our experiences with our bodies, beauty and shopping. We share websites to buy clothes like Fashion Nova Curve and ASOS. We also support each other on difficult days when we still struggle to accept ourselves. Since the day with the saleswoman, my friends have been there reminding me why I am beautiful exactly the way I am. But even with all of this amazing support, I still live in a world where people are afraid of those who radically love themselves without trying to change their bodies. I still have to deal with doctors, family members and strangers who think they know more about my body than I do and are worried about my health in relation to my weight. Last week, in my Bodies Studies psychology seminar, I shared the body- positive community on Instagram with my class, hoping to help more people find supportive accounts to follow like one of my favorites, @bodyposipanda. However, a classmate interrupted me saying she thinks posts from activists like Tess Holliday are problematic because they perpetuate obesity and she is worried about their health. It was exactly what I had been preparing to respond to, but I found myself at a loss for words. I couldn’t stand up for myself and advocate for my identity because I felt targeted. But my badass graduate student instructor saved the day and shared some findings from an article she read mentioning one’s weight is not the only indicator of health, and we cannot make these assumptions about people’s bodies. I was lucky to have her support when I couldn’t fight for myself. Now that there have been more plus size and curve models in mainstream campaigns for beauty and clothing lines, it may look like our society is comfortable with bigger- bodied people; however, there is still a lot of progress to be made with representation. For example, the Netflix show “Insatiable” had a fat character, played by an actress in a fat suit, who lost weight by having her mouth wired shut, thus perpetuating fatphobia. We need to see fat people doing more than just dealing with the fact that they are fat. We need to see fat people living their lives and having complex storylines. Also, there is a movement in the body-positive community for more representation of fat men because most of the activists and accounts are run by women. This has been the hardest column for me to write because bringing any attention to my body has always been negative. But I know by writing this, I am helping myself own my fat, curvy identity and creating a space for others to think and unpack the false narratives they have learned about fat people. Republican strategy come November Deborah Ramirez spoke out earlier this week with the help of a civil rights lawyer regarding her experience of sexual assault by Kavanaugh while they were classmates at Yale University. On Tuesday, a third woman who attended high school nearby Kavanaugh, accused the nominee of sexual misconduct during a string of high school parties. The course of action before the Senate should have been clear: investigate these allegations seriously and thoroughly before elevating Kavanaugh for a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court. Yet Republicans in the majority have sought to disregard or discredit the seriousness of the matter. In response to hearing rumors of the second set of allegations, The New Yorker reported Senate Republicans chose to accelerate the confirmation process rather than slow down and allow Ramirez to tell her story. The Senate Judiciary Committee even chose to schedule Kavanaugh’s nomination for Friday, thereby assuming the testimony from Blasy- Ford the day before will have no effect on continuing the nomination process. As college students, we are appalled. Senate Republicans, don’t tell the Ramirezs and Kavanaughs that walk among us today that there is a statute of limitations on one’s moral character. Yet, Senate Republicans have chosen in their actions to broadcast to the world — and us — allegations of sexual misconduct from a man’s past should have no serious bearing on his elevation to the nation’s highest court. What does that say to the high school students and college freshmen across the country? The rhetoric, from President Donald Trump in particular, exudes a rationale and sense of exception for both a young Kavanaugh and Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh. But how can we disregard the actions of one from the other? The allegations against Kavanaugh bring into question the standards surrounding the morality and character we hold our officials to. Yet, it is no longer acceptable to only hold those in positions of power accountable. The consistent argument from Trump, Kavanaugh and other Republican officials hinging on the time lag between the public accusations and when the events actually occurred brings into question how we hold those our age, those around us, accountable for their actions. On a campus confronting the same issues of sexual assault, survivor care and dangerous party culture, we need to hold our peers to a standard of character. The dorm party that becomes uncomfortable and crosses a line, someone taking advantage of another student at that Welcome Week house party and the inappropriate advances happening next you at a bar – these instances, not all that different from the experiences the three women underwent, happen all too often on our campus. Yes, a conversation and active change regarding how we evaluate the character of the men and women we put in office is vital. But, if the Kavanaugh accusations highlight anything, it is that there is no expiration date for the repercussions of our past actions. There should be no acceptance, regardless of age, position or situation when it comes to sexual assault. Almost 30 years ago we had an opportunity to set a precedent for how we treat survivors. It was hailed as a watershed moment, but we ended up going backward. Democratic senators treated Anita Hill, Justice Clarence Thomas’s sexual assault accuser, with outright disdain and disrespect. The hearings and investigations into Kavanaugh’s conduct are an opportunity to set a new precedent of respect, to bring justice to the victims and to do right by Hill and all those neglected in the past. If Senate Republicans choose to continue the course of plowing ahead with Kavanaugh’s nomination, it becomes imperative we exercise our right to hold officials accountable and go out and vote. If you would want the alleged sexual assaulter sitting next to you properly investigated, make sure nominees to the highest court in the nation are too. Aaron Baker can be reached at aaronbak@umich.edu. Do you love to debate today’s important issues? Do you want your voice heard? We hold twice-weekly Editorial Board meetings at our newsroom at 420 Maynard St. in Ann Arbor, where we discuss local, state and national issues relevant to campus. We meet Mondays and Wednesdays from 7:15 p.m. to 8:45 p.m. Learn more about how to join Editboard here. FROM THE DAILY Our eyes are on the Senate T his week, two new sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh surfaced. As of Wednesday, three women have come forward with allegations against the potential candidate for one of the most important seats in our government. Last week, Christine Blasey Ford, a professor at Palo Alto University, went public with a disturbing incident that occurred while her and Kavanaugh were at a high school party. AARON BAKER | COLUMN Ellery Rosenzweig can be reached at erosenz@umich.edu. T hough it’s been more than 20 years since marijuana legalization became popular in the ballots, the Green Wolverine Science Symposium marks the first student-organized cannabis science conference in University of Michigan history. Among the seemingly endless opinions regarding approval and legalization of cannabis, there remains truth in scientific research, and this event intends to highlight the latest, groundbreaking advancements from some of the country’s leading cannabis experts. It will diplomatically challenge the student body’s knowledge of a stigmatized topic, and it will do so without telling us how to think. The symposium was planned in anticipation of the vote on the Marijuana Legalization Initiative in Michigan’s Nov. 6 election. The proposal would allow adults 21 years old and older to possess and use cannabis under state law. Legalization of both medical and recreational marijuana has been eagerly rising as many states have already passed some form of legislation in support of the plant. It’s time for Michigan folks to decide if cannabis will be legal for recreational use in the mitten, and student organization Green Wolverine, the symposium’s host, wants to educate the Ann Arbor masses. With the core purpose of informing students and rebuking prevalent misconceptions, the event is not meant to sway minds one way or another. Green Wolverine Founder Adam Rosenberg, a Business senior, says the symposium was put together solely to objectively educate and help facilitate informed decisions. “We are not saying that people should or shouldn’t use cannabis,” Rosenberg explained. “We are going to present the information as it exists in current science and allow people to come to their own decisions based on that.” Green Wolverine, a Ross School of Business club, focuses on the educational and networking opportunities within the legal, multibillion-dollar cannabusiness industry. Though laws surrounding the industry are currently ambiguous, legal businesses are rapidly populating the cannabis market. Rosenberg recognized marijuana as a business prospect is plagued by stigmatization, resulting in its exclusion from a standard business education. Rosenberg spotted the opportunity his sophomore year at the Ross School of Business and started Green Wolverine to take advantage of the industry’s rapid growth. The club does not take a political stance and, according to its mission, directs attention only to business opportunities that are entirely legal. Now, we know there have been grand displays of student activism in the past: In March 1970, a four- day environmental teach-in at the University raised awareness and harnessed the passion that resulted in the first Earth Day just one month later. In 1965, University of California, Berkeley students organized the largest Vietnam teach-in, publicizing the truth about the war and making it easier for students to learn what’s going on in the world around them. I recognize demonstrations about war are distinguishable from those about drugs — however, similar to these teach-ins, the Green Wolverine Science Symposium is anything but a protest, making it a unique demonstration. Rosenberg agreed. “This is not a political statement, this isn’t trying to change anyone’s opinion,” he said regarding the symposium. Like its activism ancestors in their respective fields, the symposium is the first of its kind in the realm of cannabis. JULIA MONTAG | COLUMN A fresh approach to student activism Read more at MichiganDaily.com Julia Montag can be reached at jtmon@umich.edu. Trump is inconsistent because he doesn’t have any moral compass