by Joshua Hernandez, Editor-In-Chief

As the Biden and Trump campaigns close out their final days of trying to garner the support of the American people nationwide, the two candidates’ standing in a number of national polls has seen marginal movement, even after a hard-fought, action packed summer and fall. 

The 2020 Presidential Election is finally here. After months of campaigning, voter deliberation, purported corruption scandals, insult-laden debates, asinine mudslinging, and a White House ravaged by COVID-19, former Vice President Joe Biden and incumbent President Donald Trump will see all their work culminate as the American people get their chance to speak at the polls. 

In the latest national poll from Real Clear Politics, former Vice President Biden leads President Trump 51.1% to 43.9%, with an advantage of 7.2 points. 

The polls indicate that President Trump has slightly tightened Vice President Biden’s lead, but the Biden Campaign is in a good position as their lead holds steady – yet within a margin of error where President Trump is still within striking distance. 

Despite the fact that many voters nationwide have shown contempt for polling numbers since President Trump’s upset victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016, it is imperative to dispel the notion that polling numbers are wrong, per se. 

While polling numbers contain only a small sample and percentage of Americans nationally and in battleground states, the lead that has been held by former Vice President Biden over President Trump has been steadier than the lead held by Hillary Clinton four years ago. 

In recent polls of the battleground states from the New York Times, the former Vice President leads in 10 of those 13, with President Trump holding on to slim leads in Ohio, Iowa, and Texas – yes, Texas, the historically “red” state that has not been won by a Democratic Candidate since Jimmy Carter did so in 1976.

In the two congressional districts that split up their electoral votes, Biden leads in both, holding on to slim leads in Nebraska’s and Maine’s 2nd Congressional Districts. 

While Carter carrying Texas in 1976 is impressive after 44 years of seeing new political trends, it is important to note that Carter was a southerner, having been Governor of Georgia, leading to him having the trust of southern voters in general.

The question many are asking is how the former Vice President has made Texas a real battleground, considering he was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania and served as a US Senator from Delaware for more than four decades. 

The answer is simple – an increase in voter turnout and changing demographics in Texas. Due to the strenuous efforts of former Democratic Candidate for President Beto O’Rourke to turn out Texas voters and flipping some Republicans to vote for Biden, 9.7 Million Texans have cast early ballots, making up 57.3% of registered voters in Texas. It’s also important to note that Texas, as big as it already is, is a growing state that has added 1.8 Million new voters. 

By comparison, the total turnout in 2016 was 59.4% – only two percentage points more than current early voting numbers. On Election Day itself, Texas may see 12 or 12.5 Million more people vote, bringing their turnout percentage beyond 70%, which would be a new high in the new era of presidential elections. 

Around the United States in general, around 92 Million people have already cast ballots – more than twice the amount of Americans who voted early in 2016.

The historic early voting numbers can be attributed to the fears of catching COVID-19 at polling stations on Election Day, but may also be a result of spectacular efforts by Democrats to turn out new voters and help voters who did not vote in 2016 to see the importance of their vote. 

The American people will finally get their chance to speak up and use their voice at the polls. Whether polls should be trusted is up to each individual, but regardless, they show Vice President Biden holding a national lead over President Trump, and a steadier lead than the one Hillary Clinton held in 2016 at that.

Of course, though, after 2016, anything can happen. 

While President Trump has endured a tumultuous first term and reelection campaign, he still has a very good chance at winning reelection, as his underdog status propelled him in 2016 and may very well work in his favor.

If the polls are right this time around, the elder statesman in Vice President Biden will finally get a chance to hold an office he has sought for nearly five decades.

In this chart from the New York Times, the polling leads held by Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama before election day were displayed. The chart is meant to show the fallacy in polling data and how they may be inaccurate – in some of the states that Secretary Clinton was leading in going into election day, she lost them as they flipped “red” towards now-President Trump.

Essentially, no matter what polling data displays for either Vice President Biden or President Trump, neither candidate should feel comfortable solely based on polling data.

The margins of error are there for both candidates, and the American people will only know the accuracy of the polls once precincts within each state report their results.

Polling Data and Table Via the New York Times

POLLING LEADER	IF POLLS ARE AS WRONG AS THEY WERE IN…
		2016	2012
U.S.	+9 Biden	+7 CLINTON	+12 OBAMA
N.H.	+11 Biden	+8 CLINTON	+15 OBAMA
Minn.	+10 Biden	+4 CLINTON	+12 OBAMA
Wis.	+10 Biden	+4 CLINTON	+14 OBAMA
Mich.	+8 Biden	+4 CLINTON	+14 OBAMA
Nev.	+6 Biden	+8 CLINTON	+9 OBAMA
Pa.	+6 Biden	+1 CLINTON	+7 OBAMA
Neb. 2*	+5 Biden	+9 CLINTON	<1 ROMNEY
Maine 2*	+4 Biden	+9 TRUMP	+9 OBAMA
Ariz.	+4 Biden	+2 CLINTON	+2 OBAMA
Fla.	+2 Biden	<1 CLINTON	+4 OBAMA
N.C.	+2 Biden	+3 TRUMP	+3 OBAMA
Ga.	+2 Biden	<1 CLINTON	+2 OBAMA
Ohio	<1 Trump	+6 TRUMP	<1 OBAMA
Iowa	+2 Trump	+6 TRUMP	+3 OBAMA
Texas	+2 Trump	+4 TRUMP	+1 OBAMA

by Pedro Ochoa

The race for a COVID-19 vaccine intensifies as cases rise worldwide, and people are starting to lose their patience.

For drug-making companies, their future relies on if they can be the first ones to produce the vaccine first. Many big known companies are making a lot of progress to make the best vaccine possible, there are still many questions to be answered. 

With elections around the corner, there are many scenarios that can happen. Will the race slim down? Will there be bigger gaps between companies and their stages? Will there be a winner soon after the elections?

THIS WEEK’S TOP STORIES

From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many have looked to the promise of a vaccine to prevent infection of COVID-19. Vaccines typically take years to develop before they ultimately reach the market, but given the global urgency, progress is being made much more rapidly.

When candidate vaccines reach human clinical trials, they need to go through Phase 1 trials to start with. Primarily to test the vaccine’s safety, determine dosages and identify any potential side effects in a small number of people. 

Phase 2 trials further explore safety and start to investigate larger groups. The final stage, Phase 3 trials, which few vaccines ever make it to, are much larger, involving thousands or tens of thousands of people, to confirm the effectiveness of the vaccine and test whether there are any rare side effects that only show up in large groups. The World Health Organization lists candidates at various stages of clinical trials.

Here is a slightly more in-depth look at the big named candidate vaccines in the Phase 1 trials or beyond.

Moderna

Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine development appears to be at its home stretch. The company said that it completed the enrollment process of 30,000 participants in its final-stage study. While the clinical trials continue to progress,

Moderna and its manufacturing partners are doubling down on production with plans to produce 20 million doses of the vaccine by the end of the year. Assuming that two doses are required, this would be enough for about 10 million people.

Pfizer

Pfizer, one of the leaders in the race to develop a vaccine against COVID-19, said the final-stage trial of its vaccine candidate has now enrolled nearly all of the planned 44,000 participants worldwide. Nearly 36,000 had received the second shot of the two-dose vaccine as of last Monday. It has expanded enrollment in the trial to include individuals as young as 12 as well as people with chronic stable HIV, hepatitis C and hepatitis B.

AstraZeneca

Although the AstraZeneca trials were halted due to an unexplained illness during clinical trials in September, they were able to resume where they left off. AstraZeneca said it is a COVID-19 experimental vaccine that produces an immune response in both old and young adults. The vaccine also triggers lower adverse responses among the elderly, it said. Their vaccine candidates are in late-stage trials.

Johnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson resumed clinical trials last week due to a patient getting sick, due to one of their earlier trials, causing them to go on halt for a while. They were able to strike a vaccine deal with Aspen Pharmacare, a South African firm, and the J&J test vaccine is now one of four different vaccines currently undergoing clinical trials in South Africa. 

These are the four big-name companies that are almost at the finish line for this big first trial for a vaccine that is desperately needed. However, there are over 40 more companies that are in the long race for a COVID-19 vaccine. 

As election day nears in the United States, there are still many questions to be answered by the creators of the future COVID-19 vaccine company. The goal for the big four companies is to release the vaccine by the end of the year. 

Can it happen? They have been pushing the release for months now, and as cases arise, the more needed are the vaccines. Although the world is needing a vaccine as soon as possible, the company that wins the race can be in for a big payday. 

Who will win this huge race to save humanity from this global pandemic? When will the first vaccine be released to the world? 

The only thing that is certain is that when a vaccine is ready to be released, a big global focus will be brought to whoever produces the vaccine

by Andrew Fierro

Colorado has been going through three of the worst wildfires in the state’s history, damaging structures, more than 300 homes, and approximately $195 million dollars worth of damages.

The Colorado Fires started on August 13th and have continued to get worse due to the hot and dry weather. Although the cause of the actual fires is still unknown, it is currently being investigated by Colorado officials.

Last week state officials mentioned that the East Troublesome Fire was burning through a build-up of “beetle-killed” pine trees that were boosted due to the weather conditions.

These three wildfires are the three largest to date in the state’s history. The fires have taken place in areas where beetles have already been through. There is speculation and evidence that these beetles have been playing a role in accelerating the wildfires by leaving dead trees, which help contribute to the rapid spread of flames.

However, the real enemy of forests is the changing climate, which is likely the reason behind these devastating wildfires in the state of Colorado and elsewhere. 

Due to the hotter and drier climate, more beetle infestations are also contributing to the start and spread of wildfires. Without change, the problems will only become worse with wildfires like the ones seen in Colorado only being the first of more to come. 

In good news, the wildfires were not as active on Sunday with the Cameron Peak fire remaining at 208,663 acres and is now up to 64% contained, and the East Troublesome fire remaining at 193,774 acres and is now up to 37% contained. 

Due to the recent wet and snowy conditions, the firefighter’s lines are holding up even as winds increase. As the new-fallen snow melts, firefighters will now be allowed to move into areas that were inaccessible before and will be able to work in areas where the fire is still producing large amounts of heat and smoke. 

Wildfires in Colorado are not unique to just Colorado. This year, unfortunately, wildfire rates in other states and areas have picked up as well. California has been experiencing wildfires for the better half of 2020 due to the effects of climate change, Beetle infestation, and unremoved dead trees and brush have had on the environment.

More than half of the acres burned in the Western United States each year are attributed to climate change, according to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. There are also bigger and more dangerous wildfires adding to that number each year as dry weather has doubled in California since the 1980s. 

With the increasing effects of greenhouse gasses, California and other western states could see a rise of more than 78% in total area burned by 2050, unless measures are put in place to combat these problems. 

This issue has been a hot topic and debated largely in the past, but now it is becoming a real and dangerous threat to the world, and without action being taken, there will be major consequences.

The evidence is there that these wildfires are getting worse due to the change in the climate which is also due to the effects humans have had on the environment. Without measures being put in place to help combat these effects, these will only be the first of many more dangerous wildfires to come.

By Aydn Morris

As the Amazon continues to burn down to ashes, much of the world’s focus is on the future of the planet, while politicians keep beating around the bush when discussing the topic.

The Amazon is one of the world’s most important oxygen producers as well as the largest rainforest that spans through most of South America. The Amazon covers territory shared by nine countries. 

Majority of the Amazon is under Brazilian jurisdiction, accounting for 60%; followed by Peru at 13%, Colombia at 10%, and small amounts under the control of Bolivia Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Suriname, and Venezuela. 

The Amazon accounts for the most biodiverse tract in the world, with over 390 billion trees and divided into 1600 species. The Amazon is a very important part of the world’s ecosystem and has existed for at least 50 million years, although it does not guarantee a protection status.

The Amazon rainforest has always been prone to fires, but this year the fires have surpassed those of last year. According to The Conversation, “In July 2020 the Amazon fires have increased by 28% and the fires in the first week of September were double those numbers.” The fires may even increase drastically due to international agreements to prioritize funding COVID-19 relief incentives before the well-being of the rainforest.

The Brazilian government tried to keep the Amazon fires a secret and presumably lied to the people of Brazil, constantly insisting that there were no more fires. 

The Amazon is a rainforest, meaning it is extremely wet and damp throughout the year, where fires are almost non-existing in normal circumstances, while other forests, similar to those found in California, are dry and accommodate to regenerate with fires.

The fires have increased catastrophically, with 10 fires in only one part of the rainforest in the Brazilian state of Pará. The state of Pará is also considered the most deforested part of the Amazon and has majorly changed the ecosystem. 

There were a total of 28,892 wildfires in the area, according to NASA. The fires have been moving into farmland, ranches and also into nearby forests that are not a part of the Amazon; such as the Virgin forest. The rainforest has been getting drier and drier, as deforestation continues, making it more prone to fire. 

In some areas, fires have been horrific by how large they are. According to Sky News, “fires are as big as 84,000 square kilometers of land which is as big as the country Scotland, and one fire team has to contain that amount of land, and there are 5 other fires just like that.” The fire teams do not even stop the fire, they just try to contain them before the fire restarts again and grows bigger. 

The Amazon Fire has been named the worst fire by many of the firefighters that have worked for over 20 years. 

Fire control has told people if it does not rain it will be very hard to try and contain all of the fires. The fire teams have been working as hard as they can to put out the fires and try and control and prevent them from getting into the deeper rainforest.

by Joshua Hernandez, Editor-In-Chief

After the death of Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on September 18th, President Trump announced the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett on September 26th to fill the vacancy in the Supreme Court a mere thirty-five days before election day. On October 26th, Barrett was officially confirmed in a 52-48 vote by the Senate. 

In the immediate aftermath of Justice Ginsburg’s death, Democrats called for the Supreme Court seat to stay vacant until after the election was decided. The Democrats, as well as Democratic Presidential Nominee Joe Biden, were sparked by Justice Ginsburg’s final statement on her deathbed, “My most fervent wish is that I not be replaced until a New President is installed.” 

After President Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Democrats nationwide were outraged due to the proximity of the election, as well as the hypocrisy in which Senate Republicans acted once she was officially nominated to fill the vacancy. 

The outrage felt by Democrats was largely due to the fact that Republicans seemingly violated the precedent they established in 2016, when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) blocked hearings for then-President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia more than nine months before the end of President Obama’s term and the 2016 General Election. 

Furthermore, the official confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court means that President Trump and Senate Republicans have confirmed their third conservative justice in just four years, which has shifted the balance of the Supreme Court to the “right” for generations to come. Justice Barrett joins Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh as President Trump’s successful Supreme Court nominations.

A longstanding dispute has since arisen on whether Senate Republicans have politicized the federal courts and whether the Supreme Court should be politicized in the first place, as many Democrats fear that Justice Barrett will further advance President Trump’s agenda and work with her 5 Supreme Court Republican colleagues to declare the Affordable Care Act – or Obamacare – unconstitutional, a desire that the Trump Administration has long carried to follow through with. 

Furthermore, Democrats have become fearful that Justice Barrett would rule in favor of President Trump should a situation arise with the election results such as in the highly contested, notorious 2000 Election between George W. Bush (R-TX) and then Vice President Al Gore (D-TN), which came down to the Gore Campaign contesting results in Florida – which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bush by blocking a recount in Florida, giving Bush all electoral college votes from Florida, and thus the Presidency. 

In a situation that can very well happen given the uncertainty in 2020, Democrats fear Justice Barrett and her Republican Justice Colleagues would rule in favor of President Trump over former Vice President Biden should such a situation arise, thus securing the President’s reelection. 

Despite the opposition from House and Senate Democrats, as well as 2020 Democratic Nominee for President Joe Biden, the Senate Republicans, led by Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Majority Leader McConnell pressed forward with confirmation hearings and, of course, the official confirmation vote, which has come a mere eight days before the 2020 Presidential Election.

The confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett – and the 35 days between her nomination and the presidential election – has marked the shortest span of time between a nomination to the Supreme Court and a presidential election in the history of the United States. 

The seismic, unforeseen shift in the balance of the Supreme Court to the right – and the increased proliferation, polarization, and politicization of the federal courts – have cemented themselves as defining points of contention in the conservative legacies of President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. 

As expected, all Senate Democrats voted against the confirmation of Justice Barrett, with only one Republican Senator – Susan Collins of Maine – joining the Democrats in voting against Barrett’s confirmation to the highest court of the land. 

On the flip side of the hot button issue, longtime Senator, former Vice President, and Democratic Nominee Joe Biden has consistently maintained that he does not support “packing the court”, a solution offered by many Democrats to expanding the number of justices and filling those vacancies with liberal justices in order to combat the shift of balance in the court brought upon by President Trump and Leader McConnell. 

However, in a 60 Minutes interview with Norah O’Donnell, Vice President Biden did state that if he were elected President, he would formulate a bipartisan commission to analyze the federal court system and make recommendations to Biden on how to reform the courts as a direct alternative for the progressive calls to “expand the courts”, which also may very well be an attempt by Biden to depoliticize the federal courts. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing information, it is critical to understand the fact that no matter what happens one week from today in the presidential election, nobody can reverse a Supreme Court Confirmation and remove a Justice simply as a political “gotcha”. Justice Barrett is here – no matter what America may think of her – and is here to stay for the next few decades.

Despite opposition from Democrats and growing speculation that Justice Barrett will serve as a tool for President Trump’s agenda on health care and the revoking of rights of LGBTQ people and women, one thing is clear – the power of the U.S. Supreme Court has shifted dramatically for the next generation due to the efforts of President Trump and Leader McConnell, and it may stay that way until a vacancy needs to be filled, barring any unforeseen changes to the federal court system by a potential Biden/Harris Administration.

by Zach Gardiner

As California strikes to make powerful statements on climate change, Governor Newsom released a plan that could affect the future of the state.

When it comes to banning all gas powered cars by 2035, Governor Newsom has become a celebrity when talking on the subject. Regardless of his silence when discussing California’s serious problems of homelessness, environmental protection laws have covered a big focus of Newsom’s agenda. 

Newsom framed the plan as California’s answer to climate change and as an opportunity to benefit the state economically. 

“This is the next big global industry,” Governor Newsom said referring to clean-energy technology, “And California wants to dominate it”. 

Part of Newsom’s plan has set a goal for all heavy-duty trucks on the road in California to be net zero-emissions by 2045. He also plans to end all new permits for hydraulic fracturing by 2024, earning the criticism of oil and gas companies and their workers, who have called for an end to his plans as they threaten the stability of working people in the state. 

Cathy Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association, said she believed the Governor’s “ambitious” plan did not provide enough information about how the state would pay to build up infrastructure for electric vehicles, or how it would handle for how expensive gas would become for people who can’t afford to buy a new electric car. 

“I don’t see where A plus B equals C,” said Boyd.

Neither does the plan cover the transition for workers of the oil and gas production into green jobs, leading to her saying that there needs to be a serious conversation about relative pay. 

The Governor acknowledged that not everyone would embrace the 100% zero-emissions goal, but stated that nothing in his plan would prohibit Californians from owning gas-powered cars or buying or selling them.

“We’re not taking anything away,” Newsom said, “We’re providing an abundance of new choices and new technology, being agnostic about how we get to zero emissions, but being committed to getting to zero emissions by 2035.”

The Governor stated that the public’s action will help encourage greater innovation for clean energy vehicles by creating a broader market and will drive down the cost of those cars and trucks. More than 1.63 million new cars and trucks are expected to be sold in the state in 2020, according to the California New Car Dealers Association.

Newsom added that California is home to 34 manufacturers of electric vehicles, and that just under 50% of all the electric vehicle purchases in the country are in this state. Getting rid of manufacturing for gas-powered cars would ultimately help California’s economy and bring more jobs to California, contrary to belief.

Climate scientists and advocates say the world must stop the production of gas and diesel powered vehicles by 2030 in order to keep global warming at tolerable levels. California and other governments across the world are seeking to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, most likely taking years for vehicles to turn over and be replaced by zero-emission models.