Adam Ramsay's slogan seems to have an air of familiarity to it. And this time, that familiarity doesn't come from Mastercard. "There are some things EUSA can't do. For everything else, there's Adam Ramsay", says his website.
What he probably doesn't realise is that I used a very similar line for the EUSU election last year ... so either Adam is taking lessons from a guy who's lost more elections than days of the week, or he's come around to my thinking. I'll let you decide which.
Showing posts with label Adam Ramsay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adam Ramsay. Show all posts
Tuesday, 12 February 2008
Monday, 11 February 2008
A few opening comments ...
One year ago, when the opening hours of the election saw a glut of candidates put themselves forward, I questioned whether it was going too early too soon. Josh won by that strategy. So this year the candidates seem to have gone even earlier.
With Harry Cole announcing his election candidature many weeks ago, it appears that Adam Ramsay decided he had to go early too. And at least this year his website seems half decent. Nick Ward is also standing - and is the 'Labour' candidate. Now, whilst this election could degenerate into a series of tags of what each candiate is and isn't, I'll be interested in seeing how Nick differentiates himself from the pack of Labour type casts.
And with Nick & Harry announcing their manifestoes very early, will Adam cherry pick from them or come up with a rerun of his 2007 manifesto?
With Harry Cole announcing his election candidature many weeks ago, it appears that Adam Ramsay decided he had to go early too. And at least this year his website seems half decent. Nick Ward is also standing - and is the 'Labour' candidate. Now, whilst this election could degenerate into a series of tags of what each candiate is and isn't, I'll be interested in seeing how Nick differentiates himself from the pack of Labour type casts.
And with Nick & Harry announcing their manifestoes very early, will Adam cherry pick from them or come up with a rerun of his 2007 manifesto?
Friday, 9 March 2007
Looking Forward ...
Many people have asked me over the last few days for my thoughts, predictions and other ideas for the races that are going to happen in 12 months time. It's a hard one to really scope out.
Thinking back to twelve months ago, the money then was that I was would run again this year - against Josh & Adam - in a re-run of last year's External Convener battle. People suggested that Tom French & Steven Lauder would slug it out against Sara Bodle running for VPSA. No one would have mentioned Ben, Anna or Bruce for VPAA and Kwan was fairly unsure if he'd stand again. And Chris Arnold was as anti-EUSA as you could get, let alone thinking about a stab at VPS. Twelve months ago, so many varied names were being suggested from within those elected back then, that you might have put money against any of them.
To use the Grand National analogy a final time - predicting this far out, is like attempting to predict the runners in that race, without seeing what they do in between, knowing their form in the mean time, knowing their handicaps and their advantages.
In twelve months, EUSA could be a very different political animal, and the forthcoming year's Sabbs (those who have just been elected) could turn people on or off to EUSA depending on what they do.
Looking at it objectively, you can pick anyone on CoM or SRC Exec or in SRC and say "they will run because ..." and make your own reasons. People like Katherine Sellar, Nick Ward and Guy Bromley are inevitably going to be linked with standing next year. People who've just been elected for the first time may also be linked with a possible race next year. The issue is - as I say above - what will the next 8 months bring before people begin to make their minds up?
What about the people who aren't "EUSA people" currently? The likes of Will Searle, Chris Arnold and Chris Williams - people who before the beginning of February most people hadn't heard about, and most people would never have imagined standing.
What I want to see is a completely different thing (forgive the political sounding-ness of what follows). I want to see elections for Sabbaticals that are well challenged and where the electorate has a big cross-section of people to choose from. I want to see people from outside EUSA stand, and take part in elections. And I want to see new ideas in the election campaigns. Of course there are people I'd like to see stand and then go on to win, but this far out, I don't know if they will stand come next February.
Put simply - to predict now would be foolhardy, and the merits of it would be very questionable. Feel free to comment.
Thinking back to twelve months ago, the money then was that I was would run again this year - against Josh & Adam - in a re-run of last year's External Convener battle. People suggested that Tom French & Steven Lauder would slug it out against Sara Bodle running for VPSA. No one would have mentioned Ben, Anna or Bruce for VPAA and Kwan was fairly unsure if he'd stand again. And Chris Arnold was as anti-EUSA as you could get, let alone thinking about a stab at VPS. Twelve months ago, so many varied names were being suggested from within those elected back then, that you might have put money against any of them.
To use the Grand National analogy a final time - predicting this far out, is like attempting to predict the runners in that race, without seeing what they do in between, knowing their form in the mean time, knowing their handicaps and their advantages.
In twelve months, EUSA could be a very different political animal, and the forthcoming year's Sabbs (those who have just been elected) could turn people on or off to EUSA depending on what they do.
Looking at it objectively, you can pick anyone on CoM or SRC Exec or in SRC and say "they will run because ..." and make your own reasons. People like Katherine Sellar, Nick Ward and Guy Bromley are inevitably going to be linked with standing next year. People who've just been elected for the first time may also be linked with a possible race next year. The issue is - as I say above - what will the next 8 months bring before people begin to make their minds up?
What about the people who aren't "EUSA people" currently? The likes of Will Searle, Chris Arnold and Chris Williams - people who before the beginning of February most people hadn't heard about, and most people would never have imagined standing.
What I want to see is a completely different thing (forgive the political sounding-ness of what follows). I want to see elections for Sabbaticals that are well challenged and where the electorate has a big cross-section of people to choose from. I want to see people from outside EUSA stand, and take part in elections. And I want to see new ideas in the election campaigns. Of course there are people I'd like to see stand and then go on to win, but this far out, I don't know if they will stand come next February.
Put simply - to predict now would be foolhardy, and the merits of it would be very questionable. Feel free to comment.
Saturday, 3 March 2007
Post Race Analysis - SRC
So, with the Exec/Officers covered, who else was elected to the SRC. And how could they affect the policy outcomes. With many more school reps & ordinary members the situation is slightly different, but I'll take a look at who might be shaping the decisions.
Looking across the schools, its great to see that all schools bar one have members filling seats, and are therefore represented - I hope that the October election see a top up with the remaining seats filled. In amongst the mix are a number of returning members, and it is good to see continued involvement - the likes of Adam Apostoli in ACE, Stephen McFadden in Chemistry, Stewart Martin in GeoSci, Ben P in History, Bruce Golding in Maths, Ondrej Nenadl in Physics to name some.
Equally pleasing is the number of new names in the school seats, many of whom stood on manifestos which obviously really engaged with students and got people in their respective schools to vote for them; people like Rosy Burgess in BioSci, Karen Apitzch in Management or Gabriel Arafa in PPLS (even if Gabriel has been on the fringes for a while).
Going onto the Ordinary Members, this is a bit of an old hacks convention. With Tim Goodwin, Tim Gee & Tash Shotton all making the cut in the first two rounds, and Pete Harris joining them after a 14 round slog (surely he should have done better?), this part of the ballot really doesn't have too much new. The first round however did bring the surprise of the massive total for Hannah Critchlow, who's only campaign credentials seem to be her green-ness. Also elected in this round was Adam Ramsay. On the night, I'm sure that this didn't seem like an important win, but this gives Adam the chance to put something back into the SRC, and to what extent he does, depends on how much he feels like re-involving himself, as I noted below. So after 5 candidates being elected in Rounds 1 & 2, it took 'til round 11 before another, and I'm sure Stephen Allinson's fairtrade stance no doubt won him a few votes along the way - as well as being top of the ballot paper; a similar sentiment can probably be attributed to Ellie Price's victory a couple of rounds later. Also joining Pete in the final round were George Thomas and Anne Clark.
So who are these "ordinary" people? Well - the majority seem to be Green or Labour, with only a couple of independents thrown in. Most are hack, and are heavily involved in EUSA. What it may mean is that the debates in SRC are going to be heavily polarised. It could also be highly "intelligent" debate. We'll wait and see.
Looking across the schools, its great to see that all schools bar one have members filling seats, and are therefore represented - I hope that the October election see a top up with the remaining seats filled. In amongst the mix are a number of returning members, and it is good to see continued involvement - the likes of Adam Apostoli in ACE, Stephen McFadden in Chemistry, Stewart Martin in GeoSci, Ben P in History, Bruce Golding in Maths, Ondrej Nenadl in Physics to name some.
Equally pleasing is the number of new names in the school seats, many of whom stood on manifestos which obviously really engaged with students and got people in their respective schools to vote for them; people like Rosy Burgess in BioSci, Karen Apitzch in Management or Gabriel Arafa in PPLS (even if Gabriel has been on the fringes for a while).
Going onto the Ordinary Members, this is a bit of an old hacks convention. With Tim Goodwin, Tim Gee & Tash Shotton all making the cut in the first two rounds, and Pete Harris joining them after a 14 round slog (surely he should have done better?), this part of the ballot really doesn't have too much new. The first round however did bring the surprise of the massive total for Hannah Critchlow, who's only campaign credentials seem to be her green-ness. Also elected in this round was Adam Ramsay. On the night, I'm sure that this didn't seem like an important win, but this gives Adam the chance to put something back into the SRC, and to what extent he does, depends on how much he feels like re-involving himself, as I noted below. So after 5 candidates being elected in Rounds 1 & 2, it took 'til round 11 before another, and I'm sure Stephen Allinson's fairtrade stance no doubt won him a few votes along the way - as well as being top of the ballot paper; a similar sentiment can probably be attributed to Ellie Price's victory a couple of rounds later. Also joining Pete in the final round were George Thomas and Anne Clark.
So who are these "ordinary" people? Well - the majority seem to be Green or Labour, with only a couple of independents thrown in. Most are hack, and are heavily involved in EUSA. What it may mean is that the debates in SRC are going to be heavily polarised. It could also be highly "intelligent" debate. We'll wait and see.
Friday, 2 March 2007
Post Race Analysis - VPS
Quite frankly, where do I start on this one.
First off, I'm surprised it wasn't closer. I truly believed that this would go to a second round, and that second preference votes would come into play. Secondly, I didn't expect Tom to win as many votes as he did, nor Stuart to get as low a total he did - even Chris' extremely high vote total (higher than mine in last year's Presidential race) is excellent for a candidate who came into the race 4 days before nominations closed and created a manifesto, website and all the rest at such short notice, whereas Tom/Stuart were planning this assault for months.
However, what worries me is Tom himself. As one candidate put it to me last night, Tom is a case of "tick, tock, tick, tock - a bomb waiting to explode". Tom's performance on stage in his acceptance speech was diabolical, and made Tim Cobbett's comments almost look polite. To be honest, I didn't mind Tom's diatribe against me for the entirely reasonable actions I took to protect my intellectual property (as opposed to the ludicrous accusation that I was trying to divert democracy), and was quite touched to get such a large amount of appluase. What frustrated me (amongst other things) was the fact that he didn't even mention his opponents who had worked tirelessly to make the election something; that he made it clear that one Sabbatical had actively helped him in his campaign; that he suggested that Adam Ramsay was the "rightful winner", when the democratic vote (yes, the democracy that Tom is so fond of) had said otherwise; and also Tom's general behaviour on the night.
This is a man who is meant to be in charge of the Association's finances over the next year, and yet doesn't clearly know how to budget £95. His constant cheating and rule breaking frustrates me (as much as it frustrates me that the Returning Officer did nothing), and I am worried for the state of the Unions over the next year. I do hope that the Committee of Management/SRC manage Tom and keep him in line.
I worry also for the state of EUSA if Tom doesn't get his way - Tom has been seen to act like a spoilt three year old when he hasn't got his way before, and if he doesn't agree with things in the next few months, and during his time in Office, then heaven help EUSA. He has to learn how to get on with his colleagues on the Association Exec, and he will need to learn how to mend/build bridges and not destroy them. Last night's speech was the opening gambit to war, not the opening speech to a better EUSA.
Feel free to agree/disagree in the comments.
First off, I'm surprised it wasn't closer. I truly believed that this would go to a second round, and that second preference votes would come into play. Secondly, I didn't expect Tom to win as many votes as he did, nor Stuart to get as low a total he did - even Chris' extremely high vote total (higher than mine in last year's Presidential race) is excellent for a candidate who came into the race 4 days before nominations closed and created a manifesto, website and all the rest at such short notice, whereas Tom/Stuart were planning this assault for months.
However, what worries me is Tom himself. As one candidate put it to me last night, Tom is a case of "tick, tock, tick, tock - a bomb waiting to explode". Tom's performance on stage in his acceptance speech was diabolical, and made Tim Cobbett's comments almost look polite. To be honest, I didn't mind Tom's diatribe against me for the entirely reasonable actions I took to protect my intellectual property (as opposed to the ludicrous accusation that I was trying to divert democracy), and was quite touched to get such a large amount of appluase. What frustrated me (amongst other things) was the fact that he didn't even mention his opponents who had worked tirelessly to make the election something; that he made it clear that one Sabbatical had actively helped him in his campaign; that he suggested that Adam Ramsay was the "rightful winner", when the democratic vote (yes, the democracy that Tom is so fond of) had said otherwise; and also Tom's general behaviour on the night.
This is a man who is meant to be in charge of the Association's finances over the next year, and yet doesn't clearly know how to budget £95. His constant cheating and rule breaking frustrates me (as much as it frustrates me that the Returning Officer did nothing), and I am worried for the state of the Unions over the next year. I do hope that the Committee of Management/SRC manage Tom and keep him in line.
I worry also for the state of EUSA if Tom doesn't get his way - Tom has been seen to act like a spoilt three year old when he hasn't got his way before, and if he doesn't agree with things in the next few months, and during his time in Office, then heaven help EUSA. He has to learn how to get on with his colleagues on the Association Exec, and he will need to learn how to mend/build bridges and not destroy them. Last night's speech was the opening gambit to war, not the opening speech to a better EUSA.
Feel free to agree/disagree in the comments.
Post-Race Analysis - President
So as the dust begins to settle in the 2007 EUSA General Elections, the first (possibly of many, but lets see how it goes) part of the analysis into the race. This isn't going to be a Grand National style race re-run to see where the runners and riders fell, but more or a look at the results.
Josh's win over Adam was less of a surprise - simply because for many the race was too close to call throughout the contest, with the two neck and neck. The margin of victory though was a surprise - I wouldn't have expected a 600+ vote win, and would have thought that Chris Williams' transfers would have come into play. However, a turn out in excess of 4700 for the Presidential vote is unheard of, and that really would have affected the way that voters cast their vote (Josh won with nearly 900 more votes than Tim Goodwin did last year). I wonder what a couple more candidates would have done - especially if they were none EUSA hacks, who would have brought some more uninterested and normally non-participating students into the Elections. Josh also is the second Labour-based President, following Tim, and the question now has to be asked - are we in a Labour era, following the three P&P Presidents (Will Garton, Steve Cockburn, Ruth Cameron)?
Where does the win leave EUSA? Well I believe that Josh will have a postive effect on EUSA - his policies seem to have some sound backing behind them. He does need to ensure he represents all students, as I believe Tim Goodwin has done, and does not lead EUSA down a merry Party Political path like Ruth Cameron. Josh may well be a Labour student and be proud of it, but he will no doubt get a lot of stick from some of the defeated Green elements - anyone at the count last night will have been hard pushed not to notice Tim Gee's body language when congratulating Josh on stage: it could not have said "I don't like your win" any clearer or louder.
Josh will have a tough year ahead: he will be working with Mark Ballard as Rector - a man who has made it quite clear that he supported another candidate in these elections; and Josh will also have to deal with the fall out from the Holyrood Elections. If Labour retains power, I hope Josh uses the Political Capital he has for the benefit of students, rather than for himself. Josh also will have to deal with a couple of other factors that will spring up during the year, and I haven't even mentioned the VPS yet.
As for Adam - a year back in the backbenches, taking a step down from External Convenor. Adam has two options: he can continue his fight from regularly turning up to the SRC sub-committees, and push for the policy he can actively engage with; alternatively he can take a route take by many defeated Sabb candidates (Pat Hannon, Gill Dunn, Sara Bodle spring to mind), who get quickly bored of the SRC and don't engage. Adam also has the option to run again next year, if he feels it's the right thing to do - or will it be a different P&P candidate? The choice is his.
Josh's win over Adam was less of a surprise - simply because for many the race was too close to call throughout the contest, with the two neck and neck. The margin of victory though was a surprise - I wouldn't have expected a 600+ vote win, and would have thought that Chris Williams' transfers would have come into play. However, a turn out in excess of 4700 for the Presidential vote is unheard of, and that really would have affected the way that voters cast their vote (Josh won with nearly 900 more votes than Tim Goodwin did last year). I wonder what a couple more candidates would have done - especially if they were none EUSA hacks, who would have brought some more uninterested and normally non-participating students into the Elections. Josh also is the second Labour-based President, following Tim, and the question now has to be asked - are we in a Labour era, following the three P&P Presidents (Will Garton, Steve Cockburn, Ruth Cameron)?
Where does the win leave EUSA? Well I believe that Josh will have a postive effect on EUSA - his policies seem to have some sound backing behind them. He does need to ensure he represents all students, as I believe Tim Goodwin has done, and does not lead EUSA down a merry Party Political path like Ruth Cameron. Josh may well be a Labour student and be proud of it, but he will no doubt get a lot of stick from some of the defeated Green elements - anyone at the count last night will have been hard pushed not to notice Tim Gee's body language when congratulating Josh on stage: it could not have said "I don't like your win" any clearer or louder.
Josh will have a tough year ahead: he will be working with Mark Ballard as Rector - a man who has made it quite clear that he supported another candidate in these elections; and Josh will also have to deal with the fall out from the Holyrood Elections. If Labour retains power, I hope Josh uses the Political Capital he has for the benefit of students, rather than for himself. Josh also will have to deal with a couple of other factors that will spring up during the year, and I haven't even mentioned the VPS yet.
As for Adam - a year back in the backbenches, taking a step down from External Convenor. Adam has two options: he can continue his fight from regularly turning up to the SRC sub-committees, and push for the policy he can actively engage with; alternatively he can take a route take by many defeated Sabb candidates (Pat Hannon, Gill Dunn, Sara Bodle spring to mind), who get quickly bored of the SRC and don't engage. Adam also has the option to run again next year, if he feels it's the right thing to do - or will it be a different P&P candidate? The choice is his.
Live Results - SRC Ordinary
The SRC Ordinary Results are ongoing - they have been for a while.
So far, the three returning Sabbs have been returned - Tash, Tim & Tim, alongside defeated Presidential Candidate, Adam Ramsay and Hannah Crichlow.
We are currently redistributing votes in the middle order with people who haven't achieved quota. Its a slow business.
Joe Calvert has just lost his third election and as such does not have a seat on the SRC next year.
Stephen Allinson has now been elected. Nearly half of the votes he collected at this stage didn't have a further preference, so we are in for another long haul.
Ellie Price has now been elected - getting quota by 3, and with 3 places left. A rare victory for the Greens tonight.
Sarah Clarke, Pete Harris and George Thomas have all now been elected, thereby completing this stage of the proceedings.
Four returning Sabbs and a few other interesting people, basically.
Couple of school results follow - Management and something else.
So far, the three returning Sabbs have been returned - Tash, Tim & Tim, alongside defeated Presidential Candidate, Adam Ramsay and Hannah Crichlow.
We are currently redistributing votes in the middle order with people who haven't achieved quota. Its a slow business.
Joe Calvert has just lost his third election and as such does not have a seat on the SRC next year.
Stephen Allinson has now been elected. Nearly half of the votes he collected at this stage didn't have a further preference, so we are in for another long haul.
Ellie Price has now been elected - getting quota by 3, and with 3 places left. A rare victory for the Greens tonight.
Sarah Clarke, Pete Harris and George Thomas have all now been elected, thereby completing this stage of the proceedings.
Four returning Sabbs and a few other interesting people, basically.
Couple of school results follow - Management and something else.
Thursday, 1 March 2007
Live Results - President
This is it the big one ...
after Bio Science, Josh is leading Adam 375-229 (3 Schools)
after Education, Josh is leading Adam 550-351 (6 Schools)
after Health & Wellbeing, Josh is leading Adam 891-580 (9 Schools)
after Infomatics, Josh is leading Adam 1162-181 - Chris Williams is on 197 (12 Schools)
after LLC, Josh is leading Adam 1571-1148 (14 Schools)
With 6 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1598 to Adam's 1175
With 5 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1696 to Adam's 1231
With 4 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1807 to Adam's 1281
With 3 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1943 to Adam's 1391
With 2 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 2291 to Adam's 1651
Josh MacAllister is the next EUSA PRESIDENT, winning 2471 votes to Adam's 1809 and Chris Williams's 470
Congratulations to Josh. His winning tune was D:Ream's Thing's can only get better as used in a certain election in 1997 by a certain red party. Glad that I had some hand in choosing that music!
after Bio Science, Josh is leading Adam 375-229 (3 Schools)
after Education, Josh is leading Adam 550-351 (6 Schools)
after Health & Wellbeing, Josh is leading Adam 891-580 (9 Schools)
after Infomatics, Josh is leading Adam 1162-181 - Chris Williams is on 197 (12 Schools)
after LLC, Josh is leading Adam 1571-1148 (14 Schools)
With 6 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1598 to Adam's 1175
With 5 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1696 to Adam's 1231
With 4 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1807 to Adam's 1281
With 3 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1943 to Adam's 1391
With 2 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 2291 to Adam's 1651
Josh MacAllister is the next EUSA PRESIDENT, winning 2471 votes to Adam's 1809 and Chris Williams's 470
Congratulations to Josh. His winning tune was D:Ream's Thing's can only get better as used in a certain election in 1997 by a certain red party. Glad that I had some hand in choosing that music!
The Home Run ...
The final fences are gone, and all that is between the candidates and the 1900hrs voting shut down is the home run. Traditionally this is when nearly every candidate campaigning enters Pollock for one last try at getting votes out of the Freshers ... but it appears quite in Pollock thus far, and from speaking to the candidates earlier today, it appears most aren't going to come down to Pollock, citing the fact that many got a bad reception last night.
So with the clock running down, the runners and riders are approaching the finishing line - but let's not forget that in the Grand National, that last bit of the run in has been the undoing of many - anyone remember Devon Loch?
75 minutes to go ...
Edit (@1830hrs): I was wrong - the last minutes of the campaign brought out Anna, Stuart, Josh and of course this year's election couple - Adam & Tom. I suppose its ironic that having seen them start their campaigns together, they are ending it together.
So with the clock running down, the runners and riders are approaching the finishing line - but let's not forget that in the Grand National, that last bit of the run in has been the undoing of many - anyone remember Devon Loch?
75 minutes to go ...
Edit (@1830hrs): I was wrong - the last minutes of the campaign brought out Anna, Stuart, Josh and of course this year's election couple - Adam & Tom. I suppose its ironic that having seen them start their campaigns together, they are ending it together.
Wednesday, 28 February 2007
Turning for Home
Having negotiated the Presidential Debates, the candidates have less than 36hrs to convince the electorate that they are indeed the right people for the job, as they turn for home in this marathon race.
First off - congratulations to Tim Goodwin and the current Sabbs for a very successful Presidential Debate: the Debating Hall was full, there was something of an atmosphere, but the one problem that still remained was that the majority of people in the room already knew who they were going to vote for. The question remains, how to get "non-hacks" involved and interested.
So what happened at the Debates? Well to be brutally honest, not much. The debates lacked the fiery passion and biting comment between the candidates that one might have expected. In fact only one particular thing stands out - Tom French admitted that he cannot deliver on his manifesto: after being questioned by Tim Gee about the promises he has made (many of which are already being delivered), Tom said that his manifesto was more or less undeliverable. It's a statement like that, that the electorate should know about, and it is a shame that the majority won't.
The other candidates last night all performed, but special mention must go to Chris Williams: I came to the Debates not knowing much about him, and quite sceptical about all he stood for - but the way Chris spoke last night about certain issues, put him far ahead of Adam Ramsay & Josh MacAllister. Chris realised that standing is not about being a EUSA Hack, and that it is about getting involved and getting "ordinary students" involved. Adam, however came across as rather patronising and attempted to put Chris down at every opportunity.
In the VPAA battle, you still couldn't separate them with a cigarette paper - all have very similar policies, and their performances last night were all very similar and I for one can't call the elections.
So, the candidates have negotiated the "country three" fences, and there don't appear to have been any real fallers (other than maybe Tom French) - six fences out, and the long home run in, its going to be an interesting race.
First off - congratulations to Tim Goodwin and the current Sabbs for a very successful Presidential Debate: the Debating Hall was full, there was something of an atmosphere, but the one problem that still remained was that the majority of people in the room already knew who they were going to vote for. The question remains, how to get "non-hacks" involved and interested.
So what happened at the Debates? Well to be brutally honest, not much. The debates lacked the fiery passion and biting comment between the candidates that one might have expected. In fact only one particular thing stands out - Tom French admitted that he cannot deliver on his manifesto: after being questioned by Tim Gee about the promises he has made (many of which are already being delivered), Tom said that his manifesto was more or less undeliverable. It's a statement like that, that the electorate should know about, and it is a shame that the majority won't.
The other candidates last night all performed, but special mention must go to Chris Williams: I came to the Debates not knowing much about him, and quite sceptical about all he stood for - but the way Chris spoke last night about certain issues, put him far ahead of Adam Ramsay & Josh MacAllister. Chris realised that standing is not about being a EUSA Hack, and that it is about getting involved and getting "ordinary students" involved. Adam, however came across as rather patronising and attempted to put Chris down at every opportunity.
In the VPAA battle, you still couldn't separate them with a cigarette paper - all have very similar policies, and their performances last night were all very similar and I for one can't call the elections.
So, the candidates have negotiated the "country three" fences, and there don't appear to have been any real fallers (other than maybe Tom French) - six fences out, and the long home run in, its going to be an interesting race.
Tuesday, 27 February 2007
Something Bigger ...
It appears the elections may have taken a turn for the larger scale, if the story in the link below is true. Commentary on this issue to follow.
http://www.holyrood.com/nav/news/stories/story.asp?story=elec1187
http://www.holyrood.com/nav/news/stories/story.asp?story=elec1187
Sunday, 25 February 2007
Another Day, Another Flyer
The Sunday before election day brings out its usual round of "Pollock Drop" campaigning. With Adam & Tom (the usual double act/couple) already staking claim to the JMC on Saturday Lunch (and with rumours now circulating of them breaking the rules to go canvassing on Saturday), a number of other candidates were also seen out and about in Pollock - all armed with the trusty flyer, and the spiel to give to candidates.
I ask one very important question: this evening, Tom French claims to have visited each and every room in Pollock. Thus far he has had three hours of campaigning/door-to-door time in the blocks and there are over 2000 rooms in Pollock. Either he is super human or he has broken the rules: which is it? Yesterday Adam & him were in the JMC flyering, and had to be removed ... will Graham Boyack finally act and do something decisive about this rule breaking?
Also seen on site were KT, Ben and Anna in the VPAA battle and also Chris Arnold in the VPS race. With less than 4 days left til the polls close (and I'm beginning to think that it can't come soon enough), its beginning to hot up another notch.
I ask one very important question: this evening, Tom French claims to have visited each and every room in Pollock. Thus far he has had three hours of campaigning/door-to-door time in the blocks and there are over 2000 rooms in Pollock. Either he is super human or he has broken the rules: which is it? Yesterday Adam & him were in the JMC flyering, and had to be removed ... will Graham Boyack finally act and do something decisive about this rule breaking?
Also seen on site were KT, Ben and Anna in the VPAA battle and also Chris Arnold in the VPS race. With less than 4 days left til the polls close (and I'm beginning to think that it can't come soon enough), its beginning to hot up another notch.
Saturday, 24 February 2007
New Circuit ...
To continue with the analogy (and to somewhat stretch it), having completed the first circuit of the course, navigating through the water jump that was the Fresh Air interviews on Friday (the smallest fence of the course, but the one likely to cause the odd problem), the candidates head out for the second circuit of the course.
This morning sees Tom French & Adam Ramsay (are they really a couple? - you see one, you see the other!) giving out leaflets to first year voters on their way out of Brunch in the JMC in Pollock Halls. An interesting take on these two candidates - has anyone else noticed that their posters don't appear to be pasted onto cardboard, but on plyboard. Now as election rules prohibit candidates from purchasing materials to put their posters on, you've got to ask - where have they got the wood from? And so much of it too? And both candidates have the same wood it appears ... more questions than answers.
Speaking of Adam, he too has a YouTube video. At nearly 4 minutes, its much longer, has some cringe worthy "endorsements", and I question: will 'ordinary' people sit through it all and watch it (yes, I know I have, but then I'm a bit of a hack), whereas Will Searle's video - albeit for a different position - is a great deal shorter and much snappier. Thoughts, as ever to the Comments button below.
A number of posters from the other candidates also look to be suffering - but that was a result of the constant rain on Thursday rather than any other reasons. However, this weekend will see a renewed effort with no doubt even more posters going up - the question is (especially in Bristo Square): where are they going to put them up? Photos to follow.
This morning sees Tom French & Adam Ramsay (are they really a couple? - you see one, you see the other!) giving out leaflets to first year voters on their way out of Brunch in the JMC in Pollock Halls. An interesting take on these two candidates - has anyone else noticed that their posters don't appear to be pasted onto cardboard, but on plyboard. Now as election rules prohibit candidates from purchasing materials to put their posters on, you've got to ask - where have they got the wood from? And so much of it too? And both candidates have the same wood it appears ... more questions than answers.
Speaking of Adam, he too has a YouTube video. At nearly 4 minutes, its much longer, has some cringe worthy "endorsements", and I question: will 'ordinary' people sit through it all and watch it (yes, I know I have, but then I'm a bit of a hack), whereas Will Searle's video - albeit for a different position - is a great deal shorter and much snappier. Thoughts, as ever to the Comments button below.
A number of posters from the other candidates also look to be suffering - but that was a result of the constant rain on Thursday rather than any other reasons. However, this weekend will see a renewed effort with no doubt even more posters going up - the question is (especially in Bristo Square): where are they going to put them up? Photos to follow.
Friday, 23 February 2007
Fresh Air Showdown - President
Live Blogging - across on Fresh Air Tim Johns is doing a 24 hour radio day for Comic Relief. Some people may have heard me making a fool of myself on air yesterday for charity on Blind Date, which was a good laugh. So please, go to www.myrednoseday.com/radioday or go to http://www.freshair.org.uk/ and donate.
This morning, as part of his final three hours he has the EUSA Candidates on. Listening online and watching the webcam has proved for some very amusing moments. First off, congratulations Tim - you've got Josh & Adam in a room together. That's worth a donation itself.
After some 'interesting' questions (including one I got posed on Blind Date about rubber chickens, washing up liquid and a screw driver - which Josh answered much better than I did), we had an arm wrestle - make up your commentary, it was just very funny.
This morning, as part of his final three hours he has the EUSA Candidates on. Listening online and watching the webcam has proved for some very amusing moments. First off, congratulations Tim - you've got Josh & Adam in a room together. That's worth a donation itself.
After some 'interesting' questions (including one I got posed on Blind Date about rubber chickens, washing up liquid and a screw driver - which Josh answered much better than I did), we had an arm wrestle - make up your commentary, it was just very funny.
Thursday, 22 February 2007
News, Gossip and Rumours
A quick posting before I sleep, nearly 5 posts in one day should keep all those who read this blog happy!
Posters are coming up ... and down: Lots of candidates had their posters up today, including the first major tranche of posters from Kwan Ting Chan, Bruce Golding & Josh MacAlister, and a second batch of posters from Adam Ramsay. Photos to follow. However, the afternoon brought more disconcerting news as it appears that Josh's posters have come down in Pollock, whilst all the posters on the West and North sides of George Square suffered the same fate.
The Anti-Labour Webpage seems to be causing a stir, but at the same time are people just not bothered?
Manifesto Detail: One sources has told me that the reason that Josh is delaying his website's detailed manifesto because Adam hasn't been bothered to launch a proper website yet. However, this evening brings signs of a manifesto on Josh's site. Is Adam really bothered by a website or is he just relying on a P&P vote?
Real candidate gives his views: In what is surely a first in the EUSA Elections, Will Searle has decided to go with a web interview on YouTube (and syndicated through his website and Facebook group) to explain to people who is really is. A really new an innovative idea and something no other candidate can do without just seeming to be copying. No doubt this is a vote winner. Kudos where its due for the new idea.
Funny story of the day: I was in Tesco's this evening, which is itself not unusual. I was recognised by the check out assistant who thought I was standing in the elections - after I had corrected her (and told her she was a year late), she asked for my thoughts on this year's race. After mentioning some of the candidates she asked me about Tom & Adam .... asking if they are "always together" and if they are "together". I asked if she meant that they were working together on the same 'team'. Apparently not - she was asking if they were an item, because people only ever seem to see them together. Seems EUSA has its latest couple ...
Posters are coming up ... and down: Lots of candidates had their posters up today, including the first major tranche of posters from Kwan Ting Chan, Bruce Golding & Josh MacAlister, and a second batch of posters from Adam Ramsay. Photos to follow. However, the afternoon brought more disconcerting news as it appears that Josh's posters have come down in Pollock, whilst all the posters on the West and North sides of George Square suffered the same fate.
The Anti-Labour Webpage seems to be causing a stir, but at the same time are people just not bothered?
Manifesto Detail: One sources has told me that the reason that Josh is delaying his website's detailed manifesto because Adam hasn't been bothered to launch a proper website yet. However, this evening brings signs of a manifesto on Josh's site. Is Adam really bothered by a website or is he just relying on a P&P vote?
Real candidate gives his views: In what is surely a first in the EUSA Elections, Will Searle has decided to go with a web interview on YouTube (and syndicated through his website and Facebook group) to explain to people who is really is. A really new an innovative idea and something no other candidate can do without just seeming to be copying. No doubt this is a vote winner. Kudos where its due for the new idea.
Funny story of the day: I was in Tesco's this evening, which is itself not unusual. I was recognised by the check out assistant who thought I was standing in the elections - after I had corrected her (and told her she was a year late), she asked for my thoughts on this year's race. After mentioning some of the candidates she asked me about Tom & Adam .... asking if they are "always together" and if they are "together". I asked if she meant that they were working together on the same 'team'. Apparently not - she was asking if they were an item, because people only ever seem to see them together. Seems EUSA has its latest couple ...
Wednesday, 21 February 2007
Poster Politics (2)
Later on I'll do a serious post about posters. For now, the funny side.
With any candidate being persecuted for flyering during the quiz, there should surely be a Life of Brian joke added in here ... unfortunately, I'm not witty enough to make any.
Adam Ramsay's poster campaign hasn't moved on from when I last crossed the subject, but clearly there are people who think its worse than I do (for those who can't read it clearly - let me introduce Harry Potter & The Bad Election Campaign):
Better still, is Tom French. Tom's being supported by P&P in these elections, which makes this poster - seen outside Teviot - on Saturday night even more amusing:
Yes, P&P managed to stick one of their own posters on top of a Tom French campaign poster. Better still, the posters have "Defective by Design" in the top corner ... that's irony.
And a final point - don't annoy Johnny. Our resident Quiz Master likes keeping Politics out of the quizes:
With any candidate being persecuted for flyering during the quiz, there should surely be a Life of Brian joke added in here ... unfortunately, I'm not witty enough to make any.
Negativity & Labour
It had to happen at some point, and its a commentary I've been noting in my previous posts. Ruth Cameron noted on the EUSA Forums that a website has been set up with its explicit aim of "Stop Labour in EUSA": http://www.freewebs.com/stoplabourineusa
At this stage, I'd be interested in seeing what kind of momentum such a site will generate: the Stop People & Planet website got a real backing behind it and was clearly used by a number of people to influence the vote. Negative campaigning is here to stay ... one wonders if Ruth Cameron's decision to kick off the Anti-Boris/Anti-Tory campaign (notably supported by Josh & Adam) is where this all started.
One big can of worms opened ...
At this stage, I'd be interested in seeing what kind of momentum such a site will generate: the Stop People & Planet website got a real backing behind it and was clearly used by a number of people to influence the vote. Negative campaigning is here to stay ... one wonders if Ruth Cameron's decision to kick off the Anti-Boris/Anti-Tory campaign (notably supported by Josh & Adam) is where this all started.
One big can of worms opened ...
Saturday, 17 February 2007
Looking at ... The Association (Sabbs)
So with the nominations closed, and whilst the candidates are furiously working away touching up their manifestos before the Monday deadline, and everyone pouring over the details in everyone else's battle plans, now is the time to consider the election at hand. Who's standing, what does the initial out look mean, and the rest.
So President first. Well, whilst I'd like to suggest it would be a three way battle, Adam & Josh do have the front running ground. Josh's teaser campaign might leave it late for him to show who he really is, but I've no idea if there are sufficient hits to his website to make up for this. Adam's website is "still coming" (I was in this position last year, so won't throw too many stones), but it does currently look like an extention of the Mark Ballard factory. It looks tacky, and compared with what has been so far a very poor poster campaign (more of which later), it must be hurting. Chris Williams - well, who is Chris? No website. No posters - although there are some rumours circulating about why. Chris however has one key advantage - no political slime that comes with Josh or Adam. If he can get a message out to the voters that he doesn't have the messy political background of the two "heavy hitters" this may play well with people who are sick of EUSA hacks.
Vice President Academic Affairs comes next. It is still very difficult to split any of these candidates. KT's website is now online, and is looking very smart and sleek. No posters are up as yet, but the website makes up for this - especially a very interesting section showing his comparative perfomance against the other candidates. Anna's site is more bare bones still - flash driven, it'll no doubt annoy a few people, but it does lack in content. Bruce's site is also now online, and is very simple, but very effective. There's a lot of stuff about Bruce and its presented in a simple easy manner (like KT's) which will make a lot of people a lot happier. Ben's site is moving slowly, and now includes the yellow used in the Joshesque Teaser posters.
Vice President Services - well this is where it gets dirty. Tom French seems to be having a go at anyone and everyone on the EUSA forums, and whilst this won't play out on a larger scale, the more people that become interested in the elections the more will find out. His website is up, and it is already causing controversy. There is so much on this that needs discussing, I'm not sure where I should start, so this time round I'm going to simply say that using photos of Tom and current Sabbs almost seems like endorsement from them (especially on the front page), and that using supporting quotes makes it seem like the hard sell. I'm not sure. Stuart on the other hand looks to be winning a softer kind of vote, with his interesting slogan. I've seen some of the forthcoming publicity, which does look interesting and could be a vote winner - how good it is can't be judged yet, and if it really will engage people at all is more difficult to guess. However, Tom & Stuart are ahead of Chris Arnold, who's website isn't up as yet, but is promised by this weekend, along with a manifesto thereafter. However - much like the other Chris - if it is a non-political student people want, then Chris is the choice. However much Tom bleets on about not being a Labour member, the choice is stark between "Green-Labour" (Tom), "Tory-Labour" (Stuart) or something non-Labour, non-party poltical.
Vice President Societies & Activities is probably the most difficult to really work out. Gordon's website is still coming - all we have is all we've seen for nearly two weeks with "Flash Gordon". Will Searle may have stolen a slight lead with a fresh looking, very different website. Although not much is there, it looks a lot cleaner, and I can imagine some content will bring it to life.
Societies Convenor has been returned unopposed, which means Katherine Sellar won't have a tough race like Tom French & Steven Lauder did last year. That means no surprises either.
Finance Committee is a mixture. For the first time in years, there is an election for Senior Member of Finance Committee, and with the previous post holder no longer able to stand, the man who took his place at the Bye Elections will face off against the Sabbatical who is probably disliked the most in recent times. Neil versus Tim Cobbett will be interesting - as I've said before the influence on "Diana" on this election will be a deal breaker. What is really disappointing is that for the Finance Student Members, there are only 5 people standing, compared with 10 last year. There's a distinct lack of Sabbatical candidates taking this as 'fall-back' option and so this will be a tight race.
This being the top of ballot, there's going to be an awful lot of development and it will no doubt happen very quickly.
So President first. Well, whilst I'd like to suggest it would be a three way battle, Adam & Josh do have the front running ground. Josh's teaser campaign might leave it late for him to show who he really is, but I've no idea if there are sufficient hits to his website to make up for this. Adam's website is "still coming" (I was in this position last year, so won't throw too many stones), but it does currently look like an extention of the Mark Ballard factory. It looks tacky, and compared with what has been so far a very poor poster campaign (more of which later), it must be hurting. Chris Williams - well, who is Chris? No website. No posters - although there are some rumours circulating about why. Chris however has one key advantage - no political slime that comes with Josh or Adam. If he can get a message out to the voters that he doesn't have the messy political background of the two "heavy hitters" this may play well with people who are sick of EUSA hacks.
Vice President Academic Affairs comes next. It is still very difficult to split any of these candidates. KT's website is now online, and is looking very smart and sleek. No posters are up as yet, but the website makes up for this - especially a very interesting section showing his comparative perfomance against the other candidates. Anna's site is more bare bones still - flash driven, it'll no doubt annoy a few people, but it does lack in content. Bruce's site is also now online, and is very simple, but very effective. There's a lot of stuff about Bruce and its presented in a simple easy manner (like KT's) which will make a lot of people a lot happier. Ben's site is moving slowly, and now includes the yellow used in the Joshesque Teaser posters.
Vice President Services - well this is where it gets dirty. Tom French seems to be having a go at anyone and everyone on the EUSA forums, and whilst this won't play out on a larger scale, the more people that become interested in the elections the more will find out. His website is up, and it is already causing controversy. There is so much on this that needs discussing, I'm not sure where I should start, so this time round I'm going to simply say that using photos of Tom and current Sabbs almost seems like endorsement from them (especially on the front page), and that using supporting quotes makes it seem like the hard sell. I'm not sure. Stuart on the other hand looks to be winning a softer kind of vote, with his interesting slogan. I've seen some of the forthcoming publicity, which does look interesting and could be a vote winner - how good it is can't be judged yet, and if it really will engage people at all is more difficult to guess. However, Tom & Stuart are ahead of Chris Arnold, who's website isn't up as yet, but is promised by this weekend, along with a manifesto thereafter. However - much like the other Chris - if it is a non-political student people want, then Chris is the choice. However much Tom bleets on about not being a Labour member, the choice is stark between "Green-Labour" (Tom), "Tory-Labour" (Stuart) or something non-Labour, non-party poltical.
Vice President Societies & Activities is probably the most difficult to really work out. Gordon's website is still coming - all we have is all we've seen for nearly two weeks with "Flash Gordon". Will Searle may have stolen a slight lead with a fresh looking, very different website. Although not much is there, it looks a lot cleaner, and I can imagine some content will bring it to life.
Societies Convenor has been returned unopposed, which means Katherine Sellar won't have a tough race like Tom French & Steven Lauder did last year. That means no surprises either.
Finance Committee is a mixture. For the first time in years, there is an election for Senior Member of Finance Committee, and with the previous post holder no longer able to stand, the man who took his place at the Bye Elections will face off against the Sabbatical who is probably disliked the most in recent times. Neil versus Tim Cobbett will be interesting - as I've said before the influence on "Diana" on this election will be a deal breaker. What is really disappointing is that for the Finance Student Members, there are only 5 people standing, compared with 10 last year. There's a distinct lack of Sabbatical candidates taking this as 'fall-back' option and so this will be a tight race.
This being the top of ballot, there's going to be an awful lot of development and it will no doubt happen very quickly.
Monday, 12 February 2007
Poster Politics
This year, the posters from two candidates have gone up earlier and at a speed I've not seen before. With 10 Sabbatical Candidates declared, I thought I'd have an early look at the posters.
First up the Presidential duo. Josh is running a teaser campaign - this evening saw his second run of teasers on red half (or third) A3. Simple posters, which now suggest Smart Thinking. Cheap Drinking going to be the next ones?
First up the Presidential duo. Josh is running a teaser campaign - this evening saw his second run of teasers on red half (or third) A3. Simple posters, which now suggest Smart Thinking. Cheap Drinking going to be the next ones?
Compare and contrast with Adam Ramsay's #1 for something-or-other. Printed on white paper, I have to say they are a little dull, and I'm surprised Adam isn't going green with his Green Party Credentials to match Josh's Labour Red.
Adam's posters are a mug shot, and a bad one at that - much like my election publicity from last year. They also seem to suggest he is God's gift to the electorate by being #1 at everything. I do wonder how many of his posters there are. They also seem to be up everywhere, including in Pollock Halls where he covered every lamp post on Sunday late afternoon. They seemed to be doing less well in the overnight rain.
Anna Davidson has indeed gone for the pretty girl image on her VPAA posters - although they seem heavily photoshopped and the image quality seems to suffer from it.
Tom French - well his posters are across the whole of the central area and they seem to have 101 different pledges on them. For a VPS candidate, its interesting to see they are all set infront of the non-Union building that is McEwan Hall. I think people are going to get quickly bored of the posters, and I wonder if he's got more of them than he knows what to do with.
3 weeks is a long time in poster politics.
Saturday, 10 February 2007
Burning too early?
Most people know that Adam Ramsay & Tom French have forged a 'strategic' alliance - some have even commented that Tom made his pact with Adam after agreeing not to run against Adam for President, as long as Adam (and P&P) pulled Alasdair Thompson from the VPS race to give Tom a clear run.
I'm just intrigued at how soon these two have started: Tom was flyering outside the EUSA GM on Wednesday and their posters are already up. Tom sent an e-mail to societies on Friday night asking them to tell their members about him. Their posters are up in George Square earlier.
I'm just intrigued at how soon these two have started: Tom was flyering outside the EUSA GM on Wednesday and their posters are already up. Tom sent an e-mail to societies on Friday night asking them to tell their members about him. Their posters are up in George Square earlier.
(Apologies for the poor quality photo - it gets the point across)
Will they run out of resources soon?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
