Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Federal Hill's Warning: A Baltimorean's Reflection on Leadership

Opinion

Federal Hill's Warning: A Baltimorean's Reflection on Leadership

Cannon at Federal Hill Park, Baltimore, MD

In the column, "Is Donald Trump Right?", Fulcrum Executive Editor, Hugo Balta, wrote:

For millions of Americans, President Trump’s second term isn’t a threat to democracy—it’s the fulfillment of a promise they believe was long overdue.


Is Donald Trump right?

Should the presidency serve as a force for disruption or a safeguard of preservation?

Balta invited readers to share their thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.

Chris H. from Maryland was the first to respond.

Time will tell.

As someone who has voted for Trump in 3 elections and agreeing with a majority of the policies he ran on, I constantly find myself thinking this time he has gone too far. When Trump sent federal troops to DC, I was in strong opposition. As he continued to send even more troops to Chicago and Portland, I thought back on history and what has been done in the past.

As someone born and raised in Baltimore, I have read much about the city’s history. On the eve of the Civil War, the first bloodshed was actually shed in the streets of Baltimore, not Fort Sumter, when Lincoln sent federal troops to patrol the streets of Baltimore. They fired on Baltimoreans who rioted against them. Baltimore, being a Confederate sympathizer city and home to the largest junction of railroads in the country, needed to be secured by Lincoln because if Baltimore went into the arms of the Confederates, the nation’s capital, DC, would be lost. In retaliation of the riots, Lincoln turned federal cannons towards the city as a warning to stay with the Union or be no more. Those cannons are still there as a reminder in a park called “Federal Hill.”

As time goes by, we look at Lincoln as a unifier of the country and one of the greatest presidents in our country’s history. My thoughts of being a citizen in Baltimore in the 1860s probably would have been different of Lincoln today, seeing him more as a tyrant than unifier for sending troops into my city. In hindsight, Lincoln did what was right and was able to keep the country together and abolish slavery.

Will we remember Trump in the same way? I doubt it, but time will tell.

We invite you to read "Is Donald Trump Right?" and accept Hugo's invitation to share your thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.

The Fulcrum will select a range of submissions to share with readers as part of our ongoing civic dialogue.

We offer this platform for discussion and debate.



Read More

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less
An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

How has the meaning of military victory changed? Explore Iran, deterrence, nuclear weapons, and why modern wars are fought with limited objectives.

Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

The Last War We Understood

Every modern conflict seems to produce the same debate.

Supporters argue that military action achieved its objectives. Critics ask why the enemy still exists. Iran is only the latest example.

Keep ReadingShow less