Presidential Exit polls...

dooleygav

WHo will poeple be voting for?....

EGaffney

First to say that "this poll isn't worth the paper it's written on". Due to bias in the sample (i.e. Boards users - who may personally know a candidate), inability to control the sample, and the small numbers involved.

godtabh

EGaffney wrote: »

First to say that "this poll isn't worth the paper it's written on". Due to bias in the sample (i.e. Boards users - who may personally know a candidate), inability to control the sample, and the small numbers involved.

Get over yourself

I wont be voting as I dont care

EGaffney

kearnsr wrote: »

Get over yourself

I wont be voting as I dont care

It is you who should get over yourself, apathete.

godtabh

EGaffney wrote: »

It is you who should get over yourself, apathete.

I has no impact on my so why vote? I'm not around next year

Prof.Badass

I'm going to be spoiling my votes ( i figure it's more fun than not voting) .

PurpleFistMixer

Spoil your vote by voting for the joke candidate, Preston or something.

Don't know who I'll vote for yet, have to read up a bit about their policies... that or not bother wasting my time and pick an arbitrary name.

t0mm

I'm voting Daniel, viva el revolution!!

rc28

Candidates on Trinity FM now.
Daniel actually made a slightly compelling argument to get rid of the Record!

BenGunn

Presumably everyone who voted has read the manifestos- i think Curry has a good chance of winning if he manages to spread his message of change to enough people. He'll need to get to as many ordinary students as possible if he is to defeat Horan's formidable electoral hack-machine.

Personally, I'm voting Preston for being completely hilarious. Curry can have my number two for being the only one with real policies. I seriously doubt if anyone can change the Union but Curry seems to have way more of a chance than the other two.

Boston

Isn't there are rule about only having one SU election thread ? People who don't care shouldn't be subjected to this ****e.

Awayindahils

Boston wrote: »

Isn't there are rule about only having one SU election thread ? People who don't care shouldn't be subjected to this ****e.

Last time I made rules you all went mental and I ran away from the forum for a week.

the flananator

Although Curry promises change, he just comes across as some sort of Bond villian hence I won't be voting for him.

Boston

Awayindahils wrote: »

Last time I made rules you all went mental and I ran away from the forum for a week.

Nah, that was some non-students protesting, they don't get a vote (see what I did there... )

Awayindahils

Awayindahils wrote: »

Last time I made rules you all went mental and I ran away from the forum for a week.

Great modding!

Bajingo

the flananator wrote: »

Although Curry promises change, he just comes across as some sort of Bond villian hence I won't be voting for him.

I know what you mean but he's actually quite sound...still aint voting for him though.

the flananator

I'm actually gonna vote for Preston. I mean, I believe Horan is the best man for the job, and a great guy toboot, but damn it Preston promises to stop the paedophiles, full stop, and thats something I feel strongly about.

I was also going to vote for Mick for Ents on account of how qualified and passionate he'd be at the job, but then I had an ephiphany; I want fun. I just fucking want fun. So I guess I'm going to have to vote for Amy Dunne. I mean, that shit rhymes, for fucks sake. Thats got to count for something.

gaybitch

I'm not voting for the Curry guy, because his policy about getting rid of the Dep Pres is just stupid. Oh, yes, it's a much better idea to just axe the Record rather than trying to improve it and make it genuinely competitive with the News. Nice to see a candidate who'd just amputate any part of the SU that's ailing and needs attention.

That said, I'm probably going to forget to vote altogether

JC 2K3

EGaffney wrote: »

First to say that "this poll isn't worth the paper it's written on".

What paper?

I'm going with Curry. He's right, no one really reads the Record, there's no need for it, and he seems like he might piss off some SU hacks, which cements his vote from me.

gaybitch

Ah, that's just not the right attitude though, is it? I'm not voting for Curry for the same reason I am going to vote for Rob for Dep Pres - because reform of the Record is what's needed. If they had a good website, removed the need to automatically toe the SU party line, and generated some interest in the paper, they could make themselves a viable alternative to the Trinity News. Both publications could then prosper off of the competition created by this.

I'm not an SU hack, and have literally less than nothing to do with the SU, but even I can see that Curry is trying desperately to put a positive slant on his complete dearth of experience by saying he's "outside the SU and can see what's wrong with it". 90% of us are outside the elite inner circle of the SU, what makes him and his lack of qualifications for the role so special?

shay_562

gaybitch wrote:

removed the need to automatically toe the SU party line

I'm curious, and asked this over in the other SU thread - how does that happen? How does a paper edited by an SU sabbat officer and largely written by SU people stand apart from the SU? Even if official policy is that it's independent, the joint issues of (a) people assuming it's a Union mouthpiece, undermining anything good it actually says and (b) the fact that the people writing for it aren't going to want to write bad stuff about their mates will always sink it.

gaybitch wrote:

what makes him and his lack of qualifications for the role so special?

...he actually bothered putting his time and money where his mouth is and ran for election? Seems like a pretty big difference right there.

oogyoop

Curry is always nice at the time, but can give you indigestion and even diarrhoea.

JohnnyDoogue

I think Curry policies are so self destructive for the Union. The fees issue cannot be handled by a private outside body lobbying the government. Anyway no worries all of it will have to pass through SU council. Hopefully then next years reps aren't airheads.

EGaffney

I think it's interesting that someone would care enough to register for one post attacking a candidate.

devinejay

I voted Horan on the strength of his stance on fees, that is, he wants to be part of the solution rather than blindly oppose fees. Tbh I still can't get over the SU's handling of the situation so far.

JohnnyDoogue

EGaffney wrote: »

I think it's interesting that someone would care enough to register for one post attacking a candidate.

First post has to be somewhere, my opinion is just as valid as yours on this matter. I'm not on any of the presidental candiates teams so therefore im telling it as I see it. Curry and Horan are the two of the most important candiates and I think someone who has more experience dealing with SU matters for the last four years would be better than someone who wishes to tear apart the SU. Nothing that students do will ensure fees do not come in. Free fees were'nt brought in in the first place to ease student unrest, instead as a lump sum tax cut to the middle class. If you want something done you cannot honestly expect the government to look seriously at a team of 5 professionals telling them to not introduce fees than an organised mass of students.

Prof.Badass

devinejay wrote: »

I voted Horan on the strength of his stance on fees, that is, he wants to be part of the solution rather than blindly oppose fees. Tbh I still can't get over the SU's handling of the situation so far.

Oh yeah, who would have guessed that a union would want the best for it's members?

The whole point of a union is to get the best deal possible for it's members, regardless of anything else.

If fees really need to be brought back in, then the government will do so anyway. regardless of what the su says.

I don't see how you can give out to a group for doing their job.

devinejay

Well I felt that they were unrepresentative of the student body by staging marches with what is quite probably an unobtainable aim. You said it yourself there is a certain inevitability about the re-introduction of fees, I think it'd be time better spent if the SU focused on educating those whom they represent on the realities of the matter and working towards a solution that is best for everyone rather than peddling their one-dimensional "Fees are bad" slogans.

I hope you don't get the wrong ideas about me, I'm screwed if fees come in just like a lot of people. It's for that very reason that I want the SU to stop p*ssing in the wind and do something productive.

Prof.Badass

devinejay wrote: »

Well I felt that they were unrepresentative of the student body by staging marches with what is quite probably an unobtainable aim. You said it yourself there is a certain inevitability about the re-introduction of fees, I think it'd be time better spent if the SU focused on educating those whom they represent on the realities of the matter and working towards a solution that is best for everyone rather than peddling their one-dimensional "Fees are bad" slogans.

I hope you don't get the wrong ideas about me, I'm screwed if fees come in just like a lot of people. It's for that very reason that I want the SU to stop p*ssing in the wind and do something productive.

Note my use of the word "if". I don't think it's inevitable.

Even if it is, we could put it off for an extra year,maybe two, which would be a massive benifit to some students. It's the unions job to fight till the bitter end. Fighting for every inch will ensure students get the best deal possible.


Regardless of what the individuals who make it up think, there's really only one stance that the SU can have on this issue.

Jonathan

vinylmesh wrote: »

If fees really need to be brought back in, then the government will do so anyway. regardless of what the su says.

Which is exactly the reason the SU should stop pissing around and get talking about how they are gonna be phased in, how much etc.

Basically stop giving students false hope that a march can stop fees forever.

devinejay

vinylmesh wrote: »

Note my use of the word "if". I don't think it's inevitable.

Even if it is, we could put it off for an extra year,maybe two, which would be a massive benifit to some students. It's the unions job to fight till the bitter end. Fighting for every inch will ensure students get the best deal possible.


Regardless of what the individuals who make it up think, there's really only one stance that the SU can have on this issue.

Ok I take you point there, it is a union, and lordy do unions love striking! But the core of my issue is still the shallow nature of the SU's argument. Their opposition to the fees could have been far more constructive, they should be saying to the government "Don't bring back a crappy fees system because x, y, and z, there are other ways to tackle the current problem, etc." Instead it comes across as a collective "I don't want to pay fees, please don't make me pay fees"