2016 Presidential Election

Prompted by the 2016 election, the individuals involved in the Students of Color Oral History Project were particularly interested in students experiences since the nomination of President Trump. Reflections from narrators fell into three broad categories: immediate reactions, reflections on racism, and the personal experiences of racism that followed this event.

Immediate Reactions:

After hearing that Trump would serve as the 45th president of the United States, narrators’ responses ranged from shocked to actually voting for Trump as the lesser of two evils. They used words such as upset, angry, ridiculous, and “a joke.” Shaun Carter’s reaction mirrored that of a few other narrators,’ recalling that while he was upset, he nonetheless remained nonplussed about the outcome.(2) Aware that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, Diavian Gunner and Nicole Smith questioned the integrity of the election, asking “what’s the point of us voting if we [are] not the ones actually making the vote count?”(3)

"Unpopular opinion, I actually voted for Donald Trump and I get a lot of criticism for it. Like, “Oh, you're black. You voted for Donald Trump. That’s wack.” I was like, “Mmm, is it?” Albeit, you’re judging me on my opinion, where I feel like this election, this past election, was picking the better of two evils."(4) - Michea Wolfley

Out of the 31 narrators, the 2016 presidential election created a personal, internal conflict for two students. For Michea Wolfley, he was raised in a conservative town whose family members voted for Trump. To him, the criticism he received from individuals because of who he voted for was unwarranted. For Mekdes Woldu, both candidates went against her moral beliefs with abortion on the one side and her stance against discrimination on the other.

Reflections on Racism Post-Election:

Some narrators’ noted that the atmosphere on campus became divided and heavily rigid. To them, the political and social climate of the 2016 presidential election heightened racial tensions on campus. Floored that people voted for someone whose campaign actively attempted to divide the country instead of unit it, they started to wonder who on campus they could trust. Elizabeth Wright represented a handful of narrators as she talked about the fear she felt in not knowing which students at Millersville supported the racist narrative that grew out of the election.(9) This apprehension and rigidity spread into classroom environments as discussions became increasingly hostile. Many narrators’ believed that the outcome of the election served as an event that symbolically communicated it was okay to openly express racist beliefs and remarks without the threat of being reprimanded for it. To avoid the racial animosity, tension, and personal insecurity, a few narrators distanced themselves from their peers by locking themselves in their dorm rooms or refusing to approach the topic.