Readers sound off on the election
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Here are some of the more thought provoking responses to the news that Malcolm Chu and Lindsay McCluskey ascended to Student Government Association president and student trustee late last week:
"It does seem strange that Khanna's vote count is a little more than what his campaign Facebook group membership is, and yet Chu got close to 5X his Facebook group membership. Granted, that's no basis for a conspiracy but it sticks out to me a bit. I must say, I was struck by the simplicity of the voting system. It seemed like ballot-box stuffing could easily be done, and if people voted multiple times, there was no way to trace those votes to nullify them. I'm just disappointed that we will apparently have another year of SGA leadership putting their personal ambitions of leading strikes and cherry-picking political causes to rally around over the general interests of a student body that is likely much more moderate in their views. "
"In any civilized country, an election turnout below 10% would be considered illegitimate. One of the first acts of the new SGA session should be to make voting compulsory, violations of which would be punishable by a fine."
"Maybe an email reminder from the admin about elections would have helped increase the voter turnout. I mean, all the emails that go out about the men's basketball team surely do wonders for their attendance numbers, right? and word up to grad student, those who neglect to vote can't complain about what SGA does. It's NOT that hard to walk into the SGA office, pick up an informational pamphlet / ask someone what the SGA does / learn a lot about campus politics. That door is always open for interested students."
"Once again we have another year of candidates in office who were chosen, and bred, by the incumbents to continue the nonsense that has become the UMass SGA. Another year of strikes by students who represent about 5% (if that) of the student population simply wasting the time of SGA members who should be doing their jobs by representing ALL of UMass regardless of race or economic background, wasting the time of administrators who have an actual job to do (which includes trying to maintain decent public opinion of this university), and wasting the time of students like myself who's classes, and advising appointments were canceled due to a few hundred students who are really just lashing out because it's 2008 and not 1968. Another year of funding the pet projects of current and past SGA cabinets that put their own interests far before the NINETEEN THOUSAND undergraduate students they are being charged to represent and lead. While Derek Khanna may not have been the ideal candidate...at least he is not part of the ALANA Empire that has hijacked our university government and therefore might have been able to instill some programs that might get the attention of the students such as...fixing the roads, working with PVTA to run later to provide students with a safe ride home, among other things that the community AS A WHOLE could benefit from. Prancing about and disrupting the University because there are police in the dorms (which there aren't, did anyone even bother to contact UMPD? There's some level of redundancy in accusing those who are there to enforce the law of breaking the law themselves), and rolling back student fees, WHICH THE SGA THEMSELVES INCREASED (fyi, the board has increased fees that have been at or below inflation consistently, try taking an economics class) has really accomplished a lot, congratulations. Every shred of hope I had in the SGA to do its job has been lost entirely. .R.I.P. S.G.A."
Got an opinion? Contribute to the discourse yourself, either by commenting below or on the article.
Click here for the most recent Collegian news podcast. Editors Derrick Perkins and Nick Bush discuss the election results with editorial editor S.P. Sullivan.
"It does seem strange that Khanna's vote count is a little more than what his campaign Facebook group membership is, and yet Chu got close to 5X his Facebook group membership. Granted, that's no basis for a conspiracy but it sticks out to me a bit. I must say, I was struck by the simplicity of the voting system. It seemed like ballot-box stuffing could easily be done, and if people voted multiple times, there was no way to trace those votes to nullify them. I'm just disappointed that we will apparently have another year of SGA leadership putting their personal ambitions of leading strikes and cherry-picking political causes to rally around over the general interests of a student body that is likely much more moderate in their views. "
"In any civilized country, an election turnout below 10% would be considered illegitimate. One of the first acts of the new SGA session should be to make voting compulsory, violations of which would be punishable by a fine."
"Maybe an email reminder from the admin about elections would have helped increase the voter turnout. I mean, all the emails that go out about the men's basketball team surely do wonders for their attendance numbers, right? and word up to grad student, those who neglect to vote can't complain about what SGA does. It's NOT that hard to walk into the SGA office, pick up an informational pamphlet / ask someone what the SGA does / learn a lot about campus politics. That door is always open for interested students."
"Once again we have another year of candidates in office who were chosen, and bred, by the incumbents to continue the nonsense that has become the UMass SGA. Another year of strikes by students who represent about 5% (if that) of the student population simply wasting the time of SGA members who should be doing their jobs by representing ALL of UMass regardless of race or economic background, wasting the time of administrators who have an actual job to do (which includes trying to maintain decent public opinion of this university), and wasting the time of students like myself who's classes, and advising appointments were canceled due to a few hundred students who are really just lashing out because it's 2008 and not 1968. Another year of funding the pet projects of current and past SGA cabinets that put their own interests far before the NINETEEN THOUSAND undergraduate students they are being charged to represent and lead. While Derek Khanna may not have been the ideal candidate...at least he is not part of the ALANA Empire that has hijacked our university government and therefore might have been able to instill some programs that might get the attention of the students such as...fixing the roads, working with PVTA to run later to provide students with a safe ride home, among other things that the community AS A WHOLE could benefit from. Prancing about and disrupting the University because there are police in the dorms (which there aren't, did anyone even bother to contact UMPD? There's some level of redundancy in accusing those who are there to enforce the law of breaking the law themselves), and rolling back student fees, WHICH THE SGA THEMSELVES INCREASED (fyi, the board has increased fees that have been at or below inflation consistently, try taking an economics class) has really accomplished a lot, congratulations. Every shred of hope I had in the SGA to do its job has been lost entirely. .R.I.P. S.G.A."
Got an opinion? Contribute to the discourse yourself, either by commenting below or on the article.
Click here for the most recent Collegian news podcast. Editors Derrick Perkins and Nick Bush discuss the election results with editorial editor S.P. Sullivan.