(Sam Douglas / Fourth Estate)

The two sides discuss some of the most important issues affecting Virginians and Mason students

BY PETER MAHLER, STAFF WRITER

College Republicans at GMU and Democrats at Mason discussed a number of issues affecting Mason students and Northern Virginians during the annual “Election Forum Debate” on Oct. 28. 

Topics covered included the upcoming Va. election, immigration, diversity on campus, political violence and even whether pumpkin pie is better than apple pie.

Though neither side could find common ground on that last issue, they agreed on one thing: the importance of engaging in respectful discourse. 

This comes during a moment of political tension as Virginians prepare for the 2025 general election on Tuesday, Nov. 4. 

The debate was sponsored by Bridge at Mason as part of its mission to “encourage nonpartisanship and civil communication.” 

In an effort to maintain civility during the discussion, Bridge at Mason’s moderators set the ground rules both before and during the forum. Both sides were asked to sign an agreement to uphold the norms of the discussion, while the audience was instructed to keep decorum to minimize tension.

Representing the College Republicans was Chapter President Blake Reed and President emeritus Ali Motamedi. They debated with Democrats at Mason Vice-President Keely Calloway and Treasurer Pranav Choudhary.

Reed and Motamedi frequently emphasized the importance of free speech in the face of political violence. 

“We believe free speech is an unequivocal right that comes from God,” said Reed. “We need to be able to have these difficult discussions, just as Mr. [Charlie] Kirk intended.”

(Sam Douglas / Fourth Estate)

On the other end, the Democrats reiterated much of the same point. Choudhary emphasized his staunch support of the protection of free speech. 

“We believe that people are entitled to their free speech and their state of liberties, and they shouldn’t be punished for the exercise of that,” he said.

The Republicans took a hard stance on ending what they called “violence perpetrated by the left.”

“I think it’s disgusting,” Motamedi said when discussing how he thinks the left “lionizes” the killer of Charlie Kirk and the attempted assassin of President Trump. 

“I think [the left] needs to do a good job at disavowing that,” he said. Motamedi offered the possibility of the Department of Justice and the FBI doing more to investigate left-wing political violence. 

“It’s time to tone down the temperature in a lot of ways,” said Choudhary,” and I think that starts by acknowledging that our opponents are just people with whom we disagree, and that we share the same desire to better our country.” 

“They are not the enemy, and they are not people deserving of violence,” he said. 

While the Republicans said faith in God would help end political violence, the Democrats said ending the “male loneliness epidemic” was a more pressing issue.

The debate saw the two sides disagree on the topics of immigration and Mason’s stance on international students. 

The College Republicans took a restrictive stance, arguing that American-born students should take precedent over foreign ones. 

“The American government should put the American people first,” Motamedi said. “I don’t think international students should necessarily come here, and I think it should be rigorously enforced.”

Mason Democrats countered and said that international students provide value to the community, with Calloway offering the stance that barring them from American universities risks losing the economic advantages they bring with them.

“They are a staple at George Mason, as there are hundreds of international students here,” Calloway said. 

The Democrats opposed the investigations levied against Mason President Gregory Washington by the Department of Education and Department of Justice, with Calloway calling them a “political witch hunt” centered around reversing Washington’s progress of inclusion. 

“George Mason prides itself on ideological diversity,” Choudhary added. 

He emphasized that diversity by highlighting the “major conservative donors” in Mason’s economics department, such as the Koch family foundations and the Antonin Scalia Law School. Choudhary said this showcases Mason’s acceptance of both left and right-leaning donors.

In response, the College Republicans justified the investigations, citing Washington’s diversity policies and “racial quotas” they believe value race and gender at the expense of character, integrity and merit.

Motamedi also highlighted Washington’s past affiliations writing for “The Nubian Message” while as an undergraduate student at North Carolina State University. He called it a “black nationalist paper” that advocates for policies like “exterminating whiteness” in America.

Regarding the upcoming election, the two sides became heated on the topic of whether Mason Votes, the university’s non-partisan political news outlet, should encourage the student body to exercise their right to vote.

The Republicans criticized Mason Votes as “unconstitutional” for promoting voter outreach, with Motamedi saying “Americans have a right not to vote.” 

He and Reed slammed the outlet as having a liberal bias. 

“If you’re not satisfied with the choices offered … then you should [not] vote. And that is your right,” Motamedi said.

The Democrats had a pro-voter response, saying that students should participate in the electoral process. 

“It’s unconscionable to say we shouldn’t vote. Everyone should vote,” Choudhary said. 

(Sam Douglas / Fourth Estate)

Calloway went on to support her colleague’s statement by emphasizing that Mason Votes’ goal is to “ensure students [the] proper access to vote and ensure they continue to vote.” 

Both sides of the debate agreed the moderators performed well during the debate. 

“Bridge always does a wonderful job,” Calloway said. “I want to give them their flowers.” 

“They seemed very unbiased,” Reed said. “ It was great that we had the questions beforehand and that we were able to prepare.” 

To create this civil environment, Bridge at Mason’s Co-Director of Operations, Emily Melton, was adamant about the extensive preparation process she and her fellow moderators — President Wyatt Hurt and Vice President Gus Schmoll — take part in before every discussion.

“We have conversations amongst ourselves about what we would allow, what we’re going to do in terms of taking care of rowdiness and things like that,” Melton said. She and her colleagues highlight the value organization has when establishing the grounds for productive conversations on the nation’s most difficult topics.

With successful moderation, both sides agreed that the election forum was a success and an example of respectful political discourse. They treated each other with dignity, shook each other’s hands, and engaged in fun banter, even after some heated exchanges and moments of tension.

Mason students can vote this Tuesday on Nov. 4 at Merten Hall between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m.