Despite George Washington’s warning against political parties, the United States we know today consists of two political parties that are becoming even more polarized. Since President Trump’s first run for the Republican party candidate and presidency, these partisan tensions have been recharged with further polarization and many individuals swearing on social media they would never date a Trump supporter. According to Pew Research Center, “45% [of Democrats and those who lean left who are currently seeking relationships] say they definitely would not consider seriously dating a Trump voter” (Brown 2020). The divide between parties and the importance of political beliefs amongst partners has appeared to only increase after the actions taken at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. My research aims to quantify this phenomenon and then discover the “why?” behind it. How many people really consider their partner’s partisan affiliation and political beliefs a deal-breaker? Further, is it a deal-breaker because of the individual’s identity and political beliefs? Using intersectionality as a framework to examine identity and the confluence of identifiers and oppressors, will allow for a deeper understanding and personal account of why individuals find partisanship to be such a big criterion in a partner.

The Constitution is a document that was made over 200 years ago by a population that could have never imagined the type of technology or social advances made in the 21st century. This creates a natural rift between governing ideals between then and now, that needs to be addressed. Rather than holding the values of the nation to a time when people were not considered citizens because of the color of their skin, there need to be updates made to the Constitution itself. The need for change and the mechanisms were both established by the Framers while creating and advancing the Constitution. The ideal process to go about these changes is split between the formal Article V amendment process and judicial activism. The amendment process has infinite scope for changes that can be done, but due to the challenge involved in trying to pass any form of the amendment through both State and Federal Congresses, that process should be reserved for only fundamental or structural changes. Judicial activism, by way of Supreme Court decisions, is a method best applied to the protection of people’s rights.

The thesis analyzes the apathetic youth turnout myth and researches to see if voter suppression can explain the reason behind low youth turnout. This thesis is a study done with Arizona State University students to assess their level of voter turnout, their levels of political engagement, and if they have experienced voter suppression. Respondents were also asked about the support given by ASU in terms of helping with the voting process. Results indicate that Arizona State students have high levels of political engagement, and that 1 in 5 ASU students have experienced voter suppression. Furthermore, ASU students on a whole are uncertain about the role ASU should play in supporting students with the voting process.

Inspired by John Rawls and his life's work Justice as Fairness, I sought to measure how much political empathy a person has and then compare this to decision-making styles in search of any relation between the two. Political empathy is a term to refer to one's willingness to utilize governmental policy to help those who are the neediest because of the understanding that humans deserve equal treatment since no one is more human than anyone else. Because of current research I found that I can test political empathy because of empathy’s correlation with political ideology; specifically, that those who are more liberal have more empathy. I test participant’s ideology in a normal setting and then present them with the concept of Rawls’ Original Position to see if they shift more one way when presented with this idea which is supposed to make them think more empathetically.<br/>I have two hypothesis that I cover: first, that more people will shift in a more liberal direction between the two tests, and second, that those who have more political empathy make political decisions based more on emotion rather than facts and reason. I tested decision-making through a myriad of tests within a focus group so I could get multiple angles at the issue. My first hypothesis was proven incorrect and while I didn’t have enough participants in my focus groups to make a clear determination, it didn’t look like there was any correlation between political ideology and decision-making styles.

Partisan politics has created an increasingly polarized political climate in the United States. Despite the divisive political climate, women’s representation in politics has also increased drastically over the years. I began this project to see if there is a partisan rivalry between women in politics or a sense of shared “womanhood.” This thesis explores the role political parties play for women in office by examining how they vote on bills, what type of bills they propose, and whether or not they work collaboratively with their female counterparts at the Arizona State Legislature. My main goals for this project are to see how strong or weak political parties are in shaping political behavior at the Arizona State Legislature and to determine if there is a sense of “womanhood” despite different political affiliations. I also explore the role party affiliation plays within women legislators at the Arizona State Legislature.

The Arizona Teachers Academy is a program that was first designed and implemented by Governor Doug Ducey in 2017 with a simple concept: to cover the tuition and fees of Arizona higher education students learning to teach in exchange for fulfilling a commitment to teach at an Arizona public school following graduation. The academy has evolved quite rapidly in its short history, going from an unfunded mandate that Arizona universities could not afford to be funded to a voter-approved tax, and seeing its student enrollment numbers increase by over tenfold. This paper seeks to be an overview and process evaluation of the program, as well as an outlook into the program’s future. As a process evaluation, the thesis includes examinations of the program’s presumed logic model, that model’s assumptions, and relevant stakeholders. I used a multi-method approach: statutory and financial data were collected from web research and agency archival collections, and a series of interviews were conducted to ask analytical questions to key stakeholders and program directors about the program’s internal operations and data findings. These stakeholders and program directors consist of staff at the Arizona Board of Regents, the Arizona Department of Education, all three major Arizona public universities (Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University, and the University of Arizona), as well as multiple elected officials and political advocacy groups that have impacted the program through legislation and ballot initiative. This thesis finds that the Arizona Teachers Academy does not have a stated logic model, which in turn led to program assumptions that fail to meet the needs of Arizona public schools and did not allow for all key stakeholders to be involved in the process.

This paper is an in-depth analysis of the actions and rhetoric of Donald Trump’s presidency from the perspective of Machiavelli’s most famed work, 'The Prince'. Its premise is born from two articles claiming Donald Trump was either the American Machiavelli or the Anti-Machiavelli, and sets out to find out which title is the most accurate. The end findings suggest that President Trump did not follow enough rules in 'The Prince' to be Machiavellian, but that Trumpism as a political doctrine has the potential grow into a modern day Machiavellianism.