Finals season is upon us, and as college students from sea to shining sea stay up until the wee hours of the morning studying in hopes of achieving top grades, a scary story has emerged out of California. When students from California State University-Northridge showed up to take their final exam, they were shocked to see the question their teacher had slipped in about President Donald Trump.
The final exam for an African Studies 161 class at California State University-Northridge asked students whether Donald Trump’s campaign rhetoric was “anti-Mexican,” “anti-Muslim,” “anti-woman,” or “all of the above.” But, sadly, that’s not all.
Another question asked students to name the groups Hillary Clinton addressed “in terms of breaking down barriers and bringing people together?” The students could select from “races,” “religions,” “genders and sexualities,” or “all of the above.”
An anonymous student who was enrolled in the online class did not recall learning any anti-Trump rhetoric in class or in the textbook reading. “The class is online-based, so the professor has not had a political bias for the most part and neither did the chapter readings, so it was really surprising to see this material on the final exam,” the student told Campus Reform.
“It was pretty random and annoying,” added the unnamed student. “Like, don’t try and make me think a certain way because everyone’s view is different.”
Professor Karin Stanford, who teaches the class, did not return Campus Reform‘s request for comment, but regardless, this is disturbing on so many levels. Young Americans are literally being forced to propagate a negative opinion of the President of the United States in order to earn good grades.
The students in this African Studies class were given no options which were even remotely neutral to President Trump. Instead, they were made to slander him or get dinged for submitting the “wrong” answer.
Clearly, the professor of this class was hoping students would answer “all of the above.” Of course, the common liberal arguments that Trump is “anti-Mexican,” “anti-Muslim,” and “anti-woman” can be easily debunked. Coincidentally, though, there was no opportunity for students to do so on their exam.
Likewise, one wonders what, exactly, Hillary Clinton ever did to “break down barriers and bring people together.” Was it when she handed twenty percent of the U.S.’s Uranium supply over to the Russians in exchange for a lucrative “donation” to her foundation? Was it when she threatened the women who were sexually victimized by her husband to ensure their silence? Was it when she used a private email server to send classified information while Secretary of State, thereby endangering the security of the United States and the safety of all her people? Or, perhaps, they are referring to the shameless pandering she did and the hot sauce in her purse — because that really makes a difference to the well-being of Americans, now doesn’t it?
In 2016, it was overwhelmingly clear that Donald Trump was fit to be president and Hillary Clinton was not. The American people voted accordingly and sent Trump to the White House. Apparently, there are people within the ranks of liberal academia who are still bitter about this. Professor Karin Stanford is one of them, and frighteningly, she has access to young, impressionable minds.