The following is a guest contribution and reflects the authors’ views alone. For information on how to submit a piece to the Opinion section, click here.
Since Nov. 5, Princeton commentators from across the political spectrum have misrepresented progressive Kamala Harris supporters.
On one hand, columnist Julianna Lee ’25 wrote a well-intentioned but misinformed op-ed characterizing left-leaning students at Princeton in broad strokes as stuck inside the Orange Bubble and unwilling to engage with other perspectives. On the other hand, certain members of the leftist community have spent more time denigrating Democrats than working to fight fascism. On both of these counts, we would like to set the record straight.
We serve respectively as the president and president emeritus of Princeton College Democrats, a group whose members worked tirelessly to prevent a Donald Trump victory. For members of College Dems, this semester has not been spent in the “Orange Bubble” of campus engaging exclusively with like-minded peers. Instead, we spent every weekend from the start of the school year until Election Day canvassing for the presidential and down ballot races in Bucks County, Pennsylvania and NJ-07, two of the most crucial swing areas in the country.
Our 10 canvassing trips, 5,244 doors knocked, and over ten thousand phone calls made exposed us to the complexities of the American electorate. These conversations were at times complicated, but overwhelmingly respectful. Most of our time was spent discussing policy like immigration and inflation on the doorsteps of families that had legitimate grievances and wanted change. It stings to be accused of existing in a bubble when we dedicated ourselves towards engaging with different opinions for two and a half months.
This work has also left us clear-eyed about the need to pursue change within America’s two-party system, a process the left should engage with and the ‘Prince’ should better represent.
Since the election, Princeton professor Vera Candiani has been cited in three ‘Prince’ articles attacking the Democratic Party as “genocidal and imperialist.” She accused Democrats of not standing with the working class or the immigrant rights movement and of not mandating abortion rights into federal law. While we share many of her values and some of her critiques, these remarks lack context and analysis, and are counter-productive to the work we must undertake in the next four years.
Professor Candiani’s critique of Democrats’ abortion policy assigns them blame for problems caused by Republicans. To enshrine abortion rights into federal law, President Biden would have needed both a majority in the House and either 60 votes in the Senate to break a filibuster or 50 votes to abolish it. Democrats briefly held a slim majority in Congress from 2020-2022, but Republicans plus two Democratic Senators wanted to preserve the filibuster. The critique to make is not one of the Democratic party, but of those individuals and of the Republicans.
Professor Candiani also described her decision not to vote while lamenting the “right-wing attacks that are going to come our way.” Disengaging from the only realistic political process that would have elected leaders not linked to the extremist groups she rightfully worries about is hard to square with effective strategies that would stop these attacks.
Votes against the Democratic Party or not voting at all made it harder for Vice President Harris to defeat Donald Trump. We recognize that voting for her might not have been the easiest choice. Over the past year, the war in Gaza has killed over 43,000 Palestinians and displaced 90% of Gaza’s population. Joe Biden has repeatedly refused to enforce supposed red lines, which emerged as a prominent critique against Harris’s campaign. However, we believe that Georgia representative Ruwa Romman put it best when she labeled voting for Harris as a “strategic [action] rather than a moral one.”
Trump’s stance on Israel is much more damaging than Harris’s would have been. He has asked Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu to “go further in Gaza.” Mike Huckabee, Trump’s presumptive ambassador to Israel, has said “there’s really no such thing as a Palestinian” and advocates for permanent Israeli control over the West Bank. Unlike Trump, Harris pledged to end the “suffering in Gaza” and acknowledged the right of Palestinians to “dignity, freedom, and self-determination.”
Electing Kamala Harris would not have been a silver bullet for Palestinian rights, nor for any cause. It takes more than one vote or even one election to change America for the better — but in a democracy, it would be stunningly remiss to write off the most direct way citizens can shape the environment we advocate, protest, and organize in. A Harris administration would have stood strongly with unions, fought to expand housing supply, invested in the care economy, and been much more receptive towards the progressive values we champion.
Our mistakes and failures to connect with voters this election cycle will be heavily litigated over the next four years, and they should be. These important conversations will continue within our club, and we invite you to join us.
Ultimately, we are proud to have supported Vice President Harris’s historic campaign. Despite facing significant headwinds and a global trend of anti-incumbent backlash, Harris’s candidacy salvaged Democrats from electoral wipeout and turned a doomed presidential campaign into a 1.7-point loss. Millions of volunteers came together to form a broad coalition of hope and dedication towards moving this country forward. Rallying behind Kamala Harris was the clear, principled, and right choice this election cycle.
Michelle Miao is a junior in the Politics department and the president of Princeton College Democrats. She is a former News contributor, and can be reached at mm3530@princeton.edu.
Nate Howard is a senior in the School of Public and International Affairs. He is president emeritus of Princeton College Democrats and president of the College Democrats of New Jersey. He can be reached at natehoward@princeton.edu.
Read More
Princetonians learned some lies about unions last semester, and it’s partly PGSU’s fault
Lillian Paterson“It is critically important that after this anti-UE campaign, Princeton students learn about one of the most important steps in a union’s collective bargaining, which comes before students start paying dues: the democratic process.”
“It is critically important that after this anti-UE campaign, Princeton students learn about one of the most important steps in a union’s collective bargaining, which comes before students start paying dues: the democratic process.”
Make Princeton a sanctuary for federal researchers
Alex Norbrook“When the incoming political administration begins to attack public research, institutions like Princeton can and must defend it.”
“When the incoming political administration begins to attack public research, institutions like Princeton can and must defend it.”
New Jersey is burning. Stop pretending Princeton won’t.
Isaac Barsoum“In the wake of these dire warnings, it is time for the University to remember that the climate crisis will one day affect Princeton’s campus even more directly — and to redouble its commitments to leadership on climate, sustainability, and environmental justice.”
“In the wake of these dire warnings, it is time for the University to remember that the climate crisis will one day affect Princeton’s campus even more directly — and to redouble its commitments to leadership on climate, sustainability, and environmental justice.”
