The Setonian endorses Hillary Clinton for President

The Voice

With Election Day rapidly approaching on Nov. 8, The Setonian has endorsed Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton for the White House.

The paper came to this decision after an Editorial Board vote by its 16 editors. No ballot was presented in the vote – instead, editors were asked to write their votes down. The final tally saw Clinton receive nine votes, while Donald Trump received two and Jill Stein one. Four members of The Setonian’s Editorial Board chose to abstain.

While this particular editorial will not reflect the opinions of every one of our editors, the notion of Clinton as president is one supported by our majority.

Overall, The Setonian feels that Clinton’s combination of political experience, stances on social issues and presidential-like demeanor – at least by comparison – makes her the best option among those being offered. She is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-taxing the 1 percent, pro-LGBTQ and pro-college cost reform. Her platform best represents what the majority of our Editorial Board is looking for in this country’s next Commander-in-Chief.

The Setonian acknowledges Clinton is no perfect candidate. Her scandals, whether it be her use of a private server for her emails or the controversies surrounding the Clinton Foundation, make her far from a model choice. Her persona is often robotic and she’s been known to pander rather than speak her own mind.

She is though, without a doubt, the lesser of the evils running in this election.

Neither third-party candidate is polling well enough to even be considered a realistic option at this point. Stein, the Green Party’s nominee, has routinely failed to elaborate on any legitimate policy proposals. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s representative, is simply inept.

Then there is Republican nominee Donald Trump. With roughly two weeks to go in this election, the former reality television star has shown himself to be nothing short of an arrogant, sexist, xenophobe. Trump is an alleged sexual predator with the temperament of a child, unfit for the White House. Furthermore, he is a threat to democracy, as shown by his unwillingness to state that he will accept the results of the election, whatever they may be.

Simply put, there is a better option in this election: Hillary Clinton.

The Setonian understands that she may not be everyone’s ideal candidate, but we also believe she is by far the best option for this country.

The Voice is intended to best represent the collective opinion of The Setonian’s editorial board. It is written by The Setonian’s Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor.

Author: Editorial Board

Share This Post On

40 Comments

  1. Why should a college newspaper publically endorse a candidate? Now it seems that if you were to report any articles regarding the election or between candidates now there is skepticism that you are favoring a candidate. This also has Seton Halls name to it, so people me now think the school supports such a candidate….let me know what you think regarding this issue.

    Post a Reply
    • The “college” newspaper is completely independent in thought from the university. Other than having the school’s name attached and having to abide by the institution’s rules, they don’t have to follow anything the University does. As the school, and the Diocese of Newark for that matter, have not endorsed a candidate, it is well within editorial board of the Setonian’s power, ability, and ‘opinion’, to endorse a candidate. If people cannot understand that a student newspaper’s endorsement of a candidate does not equal the University endorsing that candidate, sorry, can’t help you.

      A college newspaper, just like any newspaper, doesn’t have to abstain from picking a candidate running for office. They obviously thought this election was an issue that needed addressing and they addressed it by voting as a body. If it bothers you, that is unfortunate and you don’t have to read it.

      Post a Reply
      • Question, what are the institutions rules you refer to and does the university president or any other entity have a final approval or denial of what is published in the Setonian?

        Post a Reply
        • University rules, probably no profanity, don’t speak out against the Catholic church, etc. Before you point out supporting a candidate like Clinton is against the church, the church can’t officially endorse or denounce any candidate for public office, so it really isn’t against the church’s wishes/teachings. Tax reasons.

          I can’t speak for what the University does or doesn’t do, but if you’re talking about the censorship of the paper by the university, I highly doubt they have final say in what goes out. I’m sure the newspaper itself runs through it before it’s shipped out, though.

          Post a Reply
      • Hillary Clinton doesn’t care that you endorse her. You guys think that you’re the NYTimes, then you tell people that they don’t need to read your paper. Great marketing scheme. If you guys were smart, you would know what to post and what no, and this is a huge no no.

        Post a Reply
        • Wait, do you think I work for the paper? I’m just a grad student, friend, I have nothing to do with The Setonian other than reading it occasionally.

          Post a Reply
        • Jake I agree 100% with you

          Post a Reply
    • Hi Paul,

      Your question is entirely valid. The reason we decided to go ahead with an endorsement is because, like the rest of this country, this election will have a profound impact on our student body. Our hope was to create discussion, and we have indeed seen that.

      As for our future, non-opinionated coverage – we have a few things planned – it will be held to the highest of standards when it comes to objectivity, as is the case in everything we try to do, aside from opinion pieces. If readers choose not to believe that, that’s their decision.

      Finally, one last point to address, and you are not the first person to say this: The Setonian is not bound by Seton Hall’s Catholic mission or its overall beliefs. The members of our Editorial Board, who are not all Catholic, have nothing but respect for the University, Catholicism and what some would call the campuses’values. With that said, our group is made up of free thinkers with a variety of opinions. Our opinions are not limited by the University’s.

      Again, we truly appreciate the discussion and hope this answered your question.

      Sincerely,
      The Setonian E-Board

      Post a Reply
      • Michael Russell I will DOUBLE MY DONATION and make it directly to The Setonian. The penny you won’t be giving this time, can go with ALL THE PENNIES YOU NEVER GAVE BEFORE!

        Post a Reply
      • That’s funny, Michael, because I just screened a call from Seton Hall the other day, because I just didn’t really feel like donating. After this, next time they call, I’m picking up and making a donation! Proud of my alma taking a stand against HATE and being part of the political process.

        Post a Reply
  2. The writer of the article obviously is not a true Catholic if they were they would not support either canidate especially Hillary Clinton. Maybe no opinion or endorsement should be made. Why not write an article about why the current administration has failed to stop the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East by Muslim terrorists.

    Post a Reply
    • You seem to forget a group of 16 people sat down and voted, so it doesn’t matter who the author is and/or whether or not they are a Catholic. That is beside the point, anyway. They are free to state an opinion as they choose.

      You are also vastly over-simplifying the conflict with ISIS in the Middle-East. Not only are Christians a minority in whom are killed in terrorist attacks in the Middle-East, here is a statistic for religiously affiliated persons killed by terrorist attacks from 2006-2011 in the Middle East.

      “In cases where the religious affiliation of terrorism casualties could be determined, Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.”
      That is from the US National Counterterrorism Center, reported in 2011.

      Here’s a link for some light reading. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/IQ/UNAMI_OHCHR_POC_Report_FINAL_6July_10September2014.pdf

      Christians are being killed but you’re fixating on a single group while thousands of others are being slaughtered in much greater numbers. Not to mention the injection of US troops into Iraq, the toppling of Saddam Hussein, and the vast reduction of Al Qaeda in the area, a process started by George W. Bush and ‘his’ administration, is what led to the power vacuum created once our troops were removed that was filled by ISIS.

      Post a Reply
      • Matt…on the contrary there were only 12 people who voted (4 abstained)!! So with over 10,000 undergraduates only 12 peoples opinion counts!! They most certainly represent the University and I assure you the president Estvan’s phone will be blowing up!!

        Post a Reply
        • No 16 people voted. 4 voted to abstain. Funny how the only people complaining about FREEDOM of SPEECH are the people who don’t like the choice. So in other words if they had endorsed the Racist Bigot, you would have been okay with that.

          Evelyn Beatrice Hall (28 September 1868 – 13 April 1956), famously wrote and said … In The Friends of Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” AMEN TO THAT

          Post a Reply
          • First off that statement is not true! I don’t think the school newspaper should endorse ANYONE!!! So please refrain from putting words in my mouth!! Funny though I was thinking the same…people supporting this are happy with the decision 4 people made! Your twitter accounts claims you are the “VOICE OF SETON HALL” yet I have read comments saying that you do not represent SHU! So which is it??

        • This is a newspaper, and the opinion section to boot. They don’t claim to represent the entire student body with their decision… you don’t think The Star Ledger represents all of Newark’s views, do you?

          Post a Reply
    • Matt I will put this in simple terms that even you can understand. Seton Hall is a Catholic University if you are a Catholic you do not believe in abortion. Neither candidate should be endorsed due to the fact that they both believe in abortion as being legal. My email is attached feel free to contact me and I will supply you my phone number and we will meet face-to-face to discuss any issues or any political opinions you feel need to discuss. I will not continue a debate on any comment board or other social media that should be done face-to-face man-to-man. Feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience.

      Post a Reply
      • I don’t understand why meeting face to face is necessary, or why you even suggested it, this is perfectly acceptable for the exchange of ideas.

        FYI Trump’s stance on abortion is a big N O unless in extreme cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, so you may rethink your opinion on him I suppose.

        Not everyone at Seton Hall is a Catholic, though, so you must respect the views of others and not place yours on a pedestal just because you hold them as yours. It is as simple as that. The editorial board, who does not state they represent the entire student body, decided via majority vote to endorse a candidate who supports abortion.

        You don’t have to like it. All they(and America) ask is that you tolerate the beliefs that they hold(or don’t hold) and to allow the democratic process to play out.

        And I realize that abortion, especially in the eye of a practicing Catholic, is a deal-breaking issue But for others it is not. You can’t put your own beliefs above others. We and all our beliefs and stances belong on the same pedestal and it is up to all of us to allow enough room for those ideas we hold to coexist.

        Post a Reply
      • I’m a Catholic, and I’m pro-choice :o). So, actually, you can be both! Surprise! Being pro-choice doesn’t mean you’re buck wild about abortions. I wouldn’t have an abortion myself, because it conflicts with MY Catholic views. But see, I believe in a little something called separation of church and state–maybe you’ve heard of it? One of the hallmarks of our country? Thing is, not everyone in this country is Catholic! Not everyone is Christian! Not everyone is even religious at all! And as a secular country founded on the principle of separation of church and state, we have no right to enforce religiously-fueled policy on the general populace. Therefore, it’s unconstitutional to deny abortions–don’t like it? Tough. Supreme Court decide this long ago in Roe v. Wade, and yeah, you can challenge it, but it’s not so easy to repeal a Supreme Court decision–especially one that is so clearly grounded in our principle of the separation of church and state.

        So, not only can you be Catholic and be pro-choice, you can be Catholic and not be ignorant about the way our government works :o)

        Post a Reply
    • Dominic: Why exactly would it be required for the writer to be a True Catholic, like obviously are. A man of No Sin I suppose, right? Thank G-D for you guys! Great Job Setonian, as a true newspaper, this is your PROUDEST MOMENT.

      Post a Reply
      • You’re comment would actually mean something if you had the balls to spell out GOD.

        Post a Reply
      • Setonian Fan, how dare you question my faith. Obviously you are a coward that refuses to post your name and contact information. If you have the courage to do so you, Matt and the board can meet me to discuss. GOD Bless America!

        Post a Reply
        • Yes you are in the running for the Coveted Most Catholic Award given to the SHU student whu like you pretends to be a perfect cathlic who does no wrong

          Post a Reply
        • Kind of makes me chuckle that they dont have courage to write their real name? OK SETONIAN FAN!! LOL You’re dealing with a coward!!

          Post a Reply
    • Dominic what a phoney you are. By “True Catholic”, I guess you mean like you, right? Remember what Confucuis[:)] said: He who lives in a glass house, shouldn’t throw the first stone. I am pretty sure that definition you hold onto about the “Perfect Catholic” that you think you are, is twisted up just right so that it describes you perfectly. It’s a bunch of BS but heck you Trumpsters need something to rally around, no matter how lunatical it is.

      I applaud these 16 Editors who voted (and yes the 4 abstainers did vote – THEY VOTED TO ABSTAIN) and personally support their right to endorse (and/or abstain). Truth be told I would have felt cheated if after all your coverage about the election you didn’t endorse one of the candidates. I am also very happy to see that your endorsement was thoughtout and explained and not a protest vote, which in essence is a vote for Trump. I would have rathered you told me why it was Trump, (If it in fact was – Thankfully it wasn’t).

      With that said, maybe you should consider doing something similar to what the Supreme Court does; and let the Editors who support the Trainwreck (I truly find it so hard to believe & comprehend that Good, Honest, Hard Working Men (and a few woman) support this animal. But a Small minority do. Anyway they let those in the minority, write a MINORITY OPIION, criticizing the Majority opinion. And as they do in the Supreme Court the Majority gets to respond and has the final words as to why they have it right and for the record they do!

      Personally I really like Hillary, but I also can clearly see & understand why others do not like Hillary. However I cannot in any situation understand the love for Donald Trump. EVERYTHING one complains about Hillary for, Trump does in 1 form or another. EVERYTHING.

      She may be a liar. He is definitavely a bigger liar. She flip-flops, he flip-flops more. Her husband cheats. He cheats himself. If she didn’t pay taxes, fired thousands and went bankrupt 6 times what would we be saying about her? They called John Gotti teflon. Donald Trump is Super Teflon.

      Post a Reply
  3. By supporting one candidate with Seton Hall on it shows that SHU supports one party. This is bad.
    I am disappointed that my University newspaper decided to claim some fame by writing this piece. As we’ll know, Seton Hall is a Private Catholic Univeristy with our goal to enrich everyone by understanding the meaning of life and our inherited dignity. By no means, choosing either side will help. This was a poor decision on all the Setonian. “(You) have now helped to elect an administration that has been the most stubbornly unfriendly to religious believers, institutions, concerns and liberty in generations.

    Given Mr. Trump’s ugly style and the hostility he sparks in the media, Mrs. Clinton’s lead should be even wider than it is. But it’s not. And there’s a lesson in that. It’s this. Even many people who despise what Mr. Trump stands for seem to enjoy his gift for twisting the knife in America’s leadership elite and their spirit of entitlement, embodied in the person of Hillary Clinton.
    The 2016 election is one of those rare moments when the repellent nature of both presidential candidates allows the rest of us to see our nation’s pastoral terrain as it really is. And the view is unpleasant. America’s cultural and political elites talk a lot about equality, opportunity, and justice. But they behave like a privileged class with an authority based on their connections and skills. And supported by sympathetic media, they’re remaking the country into something very different from anything most of us remember or the Founders imagined.
    The WikiLeaks email release last week from the Clinton entourage says a lot about how the merit-class elite views people like those in this (university). It’s not friendly.”
    +Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

    Post a Reply
    • Zachary, no it shows who the Setonian Editorial Board endorses, nothing more, nothing less. The Editorial Board noted that MULTIPLE TIMES & CLEARLY EPLAINED what they were doing and why. Whether you agree with them or not, THEY DID!

      As to your actual points of contention as to thy saviour Mr. Trump, have you always been blind or is it a recent acccident?

      Post a Reply
  4. Paul, I think that is a ridiculous reply. Why should they endorse? Seriously, are you from this country? Did you actually read the article? They gave you about a dozen reasons why they should endorse a candidate. Not to mention that besides the ACTUAL & INTELLIGENT specific reasons they gave, one should actually ask why a UNIVERSITY NEWSPAPER shouldn’t endorse a Presidential Candidate? As the “Future” voice of our country, who better than the younger generation to take a stand & help guide our ALREADY GREAT (lets make that very clear) COUNTRY in the direction they see as “their” future. Personally I to have disagreements with some of the points taken in the article. I believe HRC is much more than the “Better of lesser evils”, however more than that belief, I believe in Free Speech and anyone devoted and committed enough to volunteer at “The Setonian” and have the honor of being on the Editorial Board should be free to write whatever is in their hearts. This piece of journalism is CLEARLY STATED to be an Editorial & OPINION based story. Thank You Setonian Editors for what was obviously a very well written and thoughtout piece that took much courage to print.

    Post a Reply
    • I think he was just trying to stir up a bit of discussion with his comment, which I reacted a little harshly to looking back on it. Let’s not be tough on Paul, he asked a couple questions and none were accusatory really.

      Post a Reply
  5. This article is poorly written, offensive and displays multiple argumentative fallacies. This will offend so many Seton Hall graduates (donors like myself). I think that everyone has a right to their opinion, but not using the face of Seton Hall to display it. I am extremely disappointed. Life lesson, never mix a religion and politics – it spells out DISASTER.

    Post a Reply
    • The Editorial Board did NOT use or hide behind the face of Seton Hall, in fact they were very clear that this was 16 editors given the chance to vote and voice their opinions. Those who didn’t vote have nothing to cry about as they passed on one of the truly unique perks of our democracy. An actual vote that counts. In fact The Setonian has regularly reported on both Positive & Negative news on campus with a BLIND EYE towards who that specific artcle might help or hurt. In other words the ITEGRITY of the OFFICE (or staff position) outweighs ALL OTHER considerations. I am very proud to be a fan and donor to this University Newspaper. I may not always agreee with what you say, but to the death I will support your right to say it!

      Your post is the only item that has FACTUAL Fallacies. EVERY FACT stated by Editorial Board was IN FACT a FACT, every opinion was stated as an opinion.

      Another famous quote: Those in glass houses, should not cast thy first stone. Very enlightening how all the “Pure, Perfect & Sinless Catholics” come out to support Mr. Trump. This campaign hinges on much more than Abortion & LBGQT rights, which the country, as a whole, has a very real position on (Pro some form of Abortion Rights polls @ 55+% and most all forms of LBGQTrights polls at Pro 60+% nationally).

      Post a Reply
  6. While you guys are entitled to your own opinion, I do not believe that a University newspaper that has a duty and responsibility to deliver unbiased information should write about such a topic. I feel like this is abusing your influence as a paper to integrate your opinion into the minds of readers. You write as if her being pro-choice or pro-gay marriage (which she used to be against) are the reasons we should elect candidates. This is purely subjective and biased. These are some reasons why some people are against Clinton and to use them as facts to say she is better is inappropriate.

    But let’s assume that your intention was to simply state the fact which was what the opinion of the Setonian was. And I am sure that was what you were going for. There are much less biased ways to explain how to Setonian concluded its opinion. You could have written “Hillary Clinton’s support of abortion and LGBT rights align with the views of most of our editors.” That you can still explain why the Setonian is endorsing her without implying that they are the reasons why everybody should support her.

    I believe the Setonian took less care than it should have regarding this piece. It takes its own opinion and insists that everyone should agree. Your job as a newspaper in the first place is to tell us what is going on and what the people think, not what you think in hopes we will agree with you. I understand that you tell readers it is opinion, but the way you wrote this article suggests that you want them to forget that. All this article did for me is show me that you will take any chance to unnecessarily glamorize a candidate and be politically correct when it is your job to be impartial. It also destroyed some of the credibility I have for the paper. Knowing that there is such an unbalanced liberal presence among your editors tells me all your articles published in the future will be almost always be swayed toward the left. Would you have went through with this article if you found most of you supported Trump? Of course not. You already knew what the opinion of your editors was and that is why you thought it would make a great story. You just proved to me that the Setonian is like all other liberal, and even conservative, media that cherry picks what it wants to report for the sake of being well liked by a popular opinion.

    Post a Reply
    • You’re right it is subjective and biased…….that’s why it’s in the EDITORIAL section. AKA the OPINION section. Good loooooord. Have you ever even heard of a newspaper before??? And where did they insist that everyone agree? Can you get me a quote from the article where it said something like “AND EVERYONE MUST BE AGREED OR YOU’LL FAIL YOUR FINALS.” Come on, bro. Relax.

      Post a Reply
  7. I don’t question your right to publish. I just think it was a poor judgement on your part to make an endorsement in this election.
    As a former associate editor of the Setonian, many years ago, and accustomed to some controversy, I think the better course would have been to either remain silent or not endorse a candidate. Thus letting the student readers eligible to vote to make their own decision without the editorial comment which frankly was particularly insulting to one candidate.
    Elections are messy by their nature. Things are said, that cannot be undone, be they true or untrue. So, as you will learn in possible future dealings in the business world, it sometimes is better to keep your opinions to yourself and vote your conscience.

    Post a Reply
  8. The Setonian is a piece of trash. Too bad you have been taking the main stream media as an example of reporting instead of just presenting facts for your readers. I’m not seeing any true journalism in this paper. Sad reflection of the program at SHU.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This