Monday Madlibs: Endorse your own GUSA candidate!

madlib14

As part of the Ed Board that endorsed the Lamb-Breen ticket for GUSA President after interviews with all eight tickets, (sidetracked: via Twitter, Senator Nick Troiano said he found it “pretentious” when student newspapers endorsed GUSA candidates. I’d say that’s about the least pretentious thing we can editorialize on, wouldn’t you?), I’m having a tough time getting my head around the Hoya’s endorsement of Angert-Kluger.

What, oh what, can clarify this for me? Madlibs to the rescue!

Create a story for “Endorse your own GUSA candidate!”
Verb
Adjective
Noun
Noun
Noun
Noun
Noun
Verb
Noun
Plural Noun
Verb
Plural Noun
Adjective

9 Comments on “Monday Madlibs: Endorse your own GUSA candidate!

  1. I just don’t know if an Ed Board made up of any students who want to be on it, generally speaking, is that much more qualified to make a decision than the students themselves (perhaps this is because of a past experience when an Ed board with a grudge misused the influence they had). I think you did a fine job giving each candidate the opportunity to state their views. I’m just not sure if going that much further and drawing a conclusion for your readers is necessary.

  2. Well, all I can say is, as those newspaper kids, we work pretty intimately with the issues the candidates are talking about. We ask questions about those issues four or five days a week, so we know when a platform is plausible and when it’s not.

    Eds isn’t made up of anyone who feels like joining, either—we do have elections, and though they may be mildly nominal, the kids who haven’t reported on GUSA know when to defer to the kids who have.

    And of course, unlike most of the student body, we get to meet all the candidates. Blog surveys and candidates explaining their platforms themselves are wonderful things, but it’s a lot easier to smell bullshit in person than on the web.

  3. I agree with Molly. Our endorsement was based on not only the interviews and surveys we conducted, but also on listening to the advice of the multiple Voice reporters who have been reporting on the GUSA beat for several semesters. They have been intimately involved in educating themselves on the issues. So I think our endorsement was a pretty well-educated decision.

    Also, we published the surveys on this blog to assuage your very concern and to make sure that students had a more thorough understanding of the candidates’ platforms than, unfortunately, the candidates typically provide.

  4. I think you guys did a very thorough job of questioning the candidates, not to mention are all over everything GUSA, including today’s excellent MadLib. I think media endorsements mean a lot, since, theoretically, you guys are the ones who know this stuff best, outside of the student government itself (at least I would like to hope about the latter). Keep up the good work.

    And if it means anything, College Dems came to the same conclusion on Lamb-Breen.

  5. We believe Calen Angert and Jason Kluger should SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA for the next year. This pair of scruffy, SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA MSB students has the requisite SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA and common sense to lead. Angert has served in the GUSA Senate and as secretary of SHUTTING THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA in the GUSA Executive Cabinet; in those roles, he dealt with issues ranging from reform of the SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA COMMITTEE to SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA diversity. Kluger has served in the Executive Cabinet as director of SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA, and has helped to organize successful events like “May the Best Man SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA”. The Angert-Kluger platform is smart and grounded. It prioritizes student SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA: Angert and Kluger aim to work with the Department of Public Safety to get students more involved in the formulation of SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA. On the national political scene, outsiders are often SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA; in student government, however, we believe that experienced leaders with the SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA necessary to meet achievable goals are I’M BEGGING EVERYONE TO JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GUSA.

  6. I’m fine with campus papers endorsing GUSA candidates. However, a little transparency would be a plus. What exactly is the process by which the editorial boards determine their coveted endorsements? Written Questionnaires? Oral Interviews? All of the above?

    -Andrew Butler, “Bro” Senator, LXR G-2

  7. Happy to tell you! I can only speak for the Voice, but we interview all eight tickets in our office in one fell swoop. We have set of standard questions (about their platforms, plans for implementation, litmus issues like SCUnity) that we ask each ticket, with any ed board member free to ask follow-ups and individualized questions as they feel necessary.

    We usually know very little about the candidates before going into it. We didn’t take into account anything they wrote for the blog surveys in our endorsement. After we speak to all the candidates, we talk about them in the order they came to our office.

    From the looks of their rendered-useless Lamb-Breen endorsement, the College Dems seem to do it by survey:
    http://democrats.georgetown.edu/

  8. Hey Molly,

    We just sent out a release about the disqualification. Voice should have gotten one. If not, let me know and I will email it to you.

    GUCD did our endorsement by survey this year, that is correct. We solicited responses from all the candidates. The e-board nominated 2 contenders, and the leadership voted on Lamb-Breen.

    We are standing by our endorsement of Jeff and Molly and are urging all our members to write them in when/if ballots do come out.

    Another year, another controversy with GUSA!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>