Why throwing mud is destroying ASG
The recent ASG elections were truly a disappointment. After spending countless hours interviewing all of the executive officers and numerous senators about what ASG could improve upon for an article this past fall, I was excited for an election that would surely bring out the best that student leaders at Northwestern had to offer to lead an organization that seemed to be bordering on effective. I was pumped for a debate on the candidates and their abilities to bring about results. Instead, I saw mudslinging, unprofessional behavior and downright absurdity.
When I read that newly-elected Mo Safdari sent out an email to his friends that called presidential candidate Bill Pulte an “evil genius” and claimed Pulte had used illegal campaign methods, I was somewhat amused and only slightly appalled. Then when Safdari proceeded to blame his unprofessional emailing on his own exhaustion, I could only say one thing: really?
But then it was reported that the election commission was blaming Mike McGee’s campaign for the fault, claiming Safdari had been a representative of said campaign. The election commission then posted a letter for students to read before voting that explained the ways in which Safdari had been incorrect.
While this was the appropriate way to handle the email, and I must give props where props are due to the election commission, the original email should not have existed in the first place, and is a symptom of a larger problem of this election cycle. In an attempt to win, the candidates resorted to the lowest of lows — character defamation.
As I talked with friends about the election, I heard rumors of bribery, racism, manipulation and general “douchebaggery” with regards to all of the candidates, especially during the 48 hours before the runoff between Pulte and McGee. But then, how else would we have differentiated between the two? Their platforms were almost identical.
And you know what? The issues the candidates discussed should be the same. Unlike in national presidential elections where there is a true difference of opinion, as a whole this student body agrees on what we want from the administration. We want more campus-wide concerts and events. We want shuttles to make our dorm-to-class commutes easier. We want a reasonable alcohol policy and meal plans that don’t scam us out of cash. ASG claims to represent the wishes of the student body, so logically the candidates platforms should be similar — they should both be what the students want.
With no difference in platforms to discuss, we moved on to the question of character. In this regard, we probably should have been focusing on what we wanted in our ASG president: someone who can represent us to the administration while keeping a handle on the massive bureaucracy that is ASG. We should have been discussing which candidate can best keep things moving and get the best results, who can push our initiatives forward and make sure that every student group gets the amount of funding it needs. We should have been asking which candidate can set realistic goals and achieve them. Instead we took the low road and argued about which one is less of an asshole, in a conversation that seemed to be led by the candidates themselves. This is the kind of crap that makes ASG seem ineffective to the student body and why no one can take the institution seriously, except those within it.
I charge the next group of ASG leaders, who will be working sleep-deprived and without credit for a common goal: don’t let your campaign methods dictate your leadership. Because after a hellish campaign, we deserve better than that. Really.
| Print
Find out how the candidates spent election night. Or you can return home.
Thank you. This is the first article I have read that describes what ASG really is: glorified student council.
truth
April 19, 2009 at 9:54 pm
I think this campaign was really just hilarious. I had a grand time watching all these pseudo-politicians play at being politicians. If only I was alive to see it all. V. disappointed.
Karl Marx
April 20, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I think Mo has a lot to learn when it comes to life in general – I don’t care if you’re running for campus-wide election or talking about a friend you don’t like, what Mo sent out was 100% wrong. I’m not a big fan of Pulte but I feel for anyone that gets called a douchebag to so many people on campus.
The worst part is, Mo’s email was the one blemish on an otherwise clean campaign. Mike took the high road the entire time and things would have been fine if not for Mo’s rogue actions. The same couldn’t be said for Pulte who tried to throw in jabs on almost every answer during the debate (Mike made only 1 retort during the entire thing – otherwise focusing on his MERITS). Pat was very professional as well though, maintaining a clean image throughout as he, too, spoke only of his and Bill’s own merits.
At the end of the day I do think Mo should be impeached if nothing else to teach him a life lesson about being a hypocrite (he was being a huge douchebag by sending out the letter defaming Pulte as a douchebag – ironic). I’m glad Mike is in office though as he himself was one of the few who maintained the high road during the campaign and will keep politics aside (as much as possible) during his campaign. He’ll be a great lobbyist to admin and certainly had the most realistic goals. As for Pulte, I think he’ll be fine but I hope people realize you can never take someone else’s word for a stranger’s character. If you’ve never worked with him or hung out with him, YOU CAN’T CALL HIM A DOUCHEBAG – how the hell would you know?
agreed
April 20, 2009 at 5:47 pm
WOW listen Mo made a mistake, he admit it and apologized for it.
He sent that email to his supporters, the people who campaigned for him every night. Those supporters forwarded it onto their listservs against his wishes. this does not excuse his word choice, but truly havent you ever insulted someone online? he called him a prick, and said his actions represented douchebaggery, uncalled for? maybe. extreme? hell no.
Mo would have been working long hours with Pulte, so when it got to the point where he couldn’t stand by and see Bill win an election that he personally had a vested interest, he finally came out the day before elections to endorse Mike, breaking his silence and maybe taking the low road. really, he apologized, he changed nothing for the election, he won it fair, he doesnt deserve to be impeached.
Bob S
April 20, 2009 at 11:08 pm