Originally Posted by sew12

That's not only presumptuous and somewhat racist but just downright stupid.

There was another candidate named Florence Prahbu who is a girl and has an Indian last name. She didn't get nearly as many votes as Joy, how do you explain that?

Isn't it more likely that since Joy is an engineer he may have influence a percentage of the large group of first year engineers to vote for him?

Surprisingly there are people who actually voted on the basis of race and gender. While waiting in line for something in the student centre, I overheard some conversations:
"I voted for the girl, because she was the only girl running!"
"Oh well I saw some Asian name and I voted for that."
Many of my friends are Asian or Korean and supported James Lim despite not knowing a thing about him.

I'm not saying this is what happened with Singh, but it DOES happen. It's too bad that out of some of the small minority of students that did vote, there are actually votes based on something like that.

The numbers show organization is key. A large organized campaign team makes a difference as well as getting out the vote. Singh did a great job of pushing people to the polls.

The MSU should a great deal of discipline this year in making sure everyone in the organization knew exactly who their candidate was. Tiwari benefitted strongly from having a campaign team which was largely composed of MSU employees/SRA members who could take time away from their jobs to campaign for him.

The question for next year, will those outside the MSU looking for reform become as organized and make it a true race?

I just think it's rather presumptuous to assume that he got that many votes because Indian people showed up and just voted for an Indian last name.

As for Greg and Joy showing up in classes they weren't the only candidates doing that so I doubt that's the only reason.

You could be right about people not actually seeing or hearing the contestants speak about the platforms.

If anyone had actually seen Joy or Florence's performances at the "debates" they probably would have thought twice about voting for them.

Originally Posted by kokosemara

Poor Terry and Hopper, I was really hoping one of them would win.

If it wasn't Lim, I wanted Terry or Hopper as well. I attended both debates and they were the only two that didn't completely disappoint me both times.

Attending those debates made me NOT want to vote at all (or just spoil my ballot). They were terrible.

Originally Posted by ladyh

If it wasn't Lim, I wanted Terry or Hopper as well. I attended both debates and they were the only two that didn't completely disappoint me both times.

Attending those debates made me NOT want to vote at all (or just spoil my ballot). They were terrible.

After the debates I was pretty sold on Terry. I also ranked Hopper on my ballot though.

I plan on running two/three years from now whether I'm involved with the MSU/SRA or not but that's a while from now so it's not significant for the time being. What I'm wondering is whether or not you can run more than once...

Why was Hopper declared "out of race" in Round Six? What was the EC ruling on that? I can't find it anywhere.

Originally Posted by fullsmash26

The numbers show organization is key. A large organized campaign team makes a difference as well as getting out the vote. Singh did a great job of pushing people to the polls.

The MSU should a great deal of discipline this year in making sure everyone in the organization knew exactly who their candidate was. Tiwari benefitted strongly from having a campaign team which was largely composed of MSU employees/SRA members who could take time away from their jobs to campaign for him.

The question for next year, will those outside the MSU looking for reform become as organized and make it a true race?

I knew it wasn't gonna about platforms, but I thought at least it would be about likability. Seems to me that the way to get votes is to get 50 people on your campaign team and get them to say your name to students over and over. If you tell them that you're a good candidate and give some stock lines, they'll give you a vote because they simply don't care enough to actually look into your platform or those of the other candidates. It just surprised me how poorly Terry and Hopper did, considering I'd say they did much better in the debates than Elvikas and Singh.

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing...

Originally Posted by kokosemara

I knew it wasn't gonna about platforms, but I thought at least it would be about likability. Seems to me that the way to get votes is to get 50 people on your campaign team and get them to say your name to students over and over. If you tell them that you're a good candidate and give some stock lines, they'll give you a vote because they simply don't care enough to actually look into your platform or those of the other candidates. It just surprised me how poorly Terry and Hopper did, considering I'd say they did much better in the debates than Elvikas and Singh.

Actually James, I have to disagree. I know a lot of people who simply didn't vote because they didn't feel they knew enough about the candidates and didn't feel comfortable with just picking a random. Granted, they should have cast an abstain ballot but I don't think it rests completely on having a large campaign team to spread your name around.

Originally Posted by kokosas

Actually James, I have to disagree. I know a lot of people who simply didn't vote because they didn't feel they knew enough about the candidates and didn't feel comfortable with just picking a random. Granted, they should have cast an abstain ballot but I don't think it rests completely on having a large campaign team to spread your name around.

I'm actually the opposite, a lot of people I talked to voted just for the hell of voting and just picked familiar names and ranked the rest randomly even if they hadn't ever heard of them. Completely ridiculous ..

Originally Posted by kokosas

Actually James, I have to disagree. I know a lot of people who simply didn't vote because they didn't feel they knew enough about the candidates and didn't feel comfortable with just picking a random. Granted, they should have cast an abstain ballot but I don't think it rests completely on having a large campaign team to spread your name around.

I think that goes without saying, the voter turnout this election was what, 13% 14%? I was just talking about the ones that did vote. Even though 13% is such an embarrassing number, that's still 2500 people, and lots of those people aren't friends of any of the candidates or their campaign team.

13%

this is sooo rad. At least now I know only a small amount of students support these goofs


(13% - ( friends that had to vote so they could say 'yah i voted 4 u) = low #) success?

Originally Posted by kokosas

Actually James, I have to disagree. I know a lot of people who simply didn't vote because they didn't feel they knew enough about the candidates and didn't feel comfortable with just picking a random.

This is so unfortunate and I know a lot of people like this too.

It's called pick up a copy of the Sil before the election or check out some Facebook groups.

Originally Posted by steve_d90

Would someone at the Sil PLEASE get steps2health invloved with a photoshop section?
I'm thinking we're lacking in the political cartoon/ps section (among others, but thats for another thread).

sarcasm? or were you being serious?
poorly redone shoops/MSPaint from templates isn't something I'd want in the sil


back to the topic.
It was obvious Vishal was going to win.

Regardless of how the MSU is doing in terms of finances, helping students with services, clubs, etc., there are going to be many people who would just vote for the one who has had experience with the MSU (this is what I believed a couple of years ago).