ULSU Elections 2013 (Voting Thursday March 14) #VoteUL

Gael23

I'll be supporting Kennedy O'Brien for president but not sure after that.

b1rd1stheword

freyners wrote: »

unless its drumsticks they might as well be talking to a wall here:D

We'll be going with the sucky sweet/drumstick combination.

Jester252

supackofidiots wrote: »

whatever. don't like the kayak club. won't be voting for her. won't be voting for james because of his crap video. who is the other c&s/kc person so I can not vote for them.

If that how you vote you should not be allowed to vote. Wait until you know there plans before you knock them off. I agree the video was terrible and reduce the chance of me voting for him but to not vote for someone because of their hobby is just foolish IMO.

Quintis

supackofidiots wrote: »

whatever. don't like the kayak club. won't be voting for her. won't be voting for james because of his crap video. who is the other c&s/kc person so I can not vote for them.

It is welfare, and if you read any of the other posts it would be quite clear that Cathal Ronan, the incumbent ins the third person running, obvious trolling won't get you anywhere

lkionm

That video is this years lad rubbing the dog.

CiaranMT

Quintis wrote: »

It is welfare, and if you read any of the other posts it would be quite clear that Cathal Ronan, the incumbent ins the third person running, obvious trolling won't get you anywhere

He was referring to Emma Porter as the 'other' KC member.

SpudWinkle

What's the situation in terms of the two KC members effectively running together? I was under the impression candidates weren't meant to campaign as a team. Is it a case that they have completely different campaign teams or what?

supackofidiots

as you can see above, he said the only reason he is in on boards on a saturday night is cause he is a candidate in the election.

obviously you're on james' campaign team though. nice try. too late though.

Quintis

supackofidiots wrote: »

as you can see above, he said the only reason he is in on boards on a saturday night is cause he is a candidate in the election.

obviously you're on james' campaign team though. nice try. too late though.

I can clarify I am not on James' campaign team, nor anyone else's campaign team, I just think someone with a vendetta who is trying to make something out of nothing because they dislike anything or anyone to do with the SU has no place here

b1rd1stheword

supackofidiots wrote: »

as you can see above, he said the only reason he is in on boards on a saturday night is cause he is a candidate in the election.

obviously you're on james' campaign team though. nice try. too late though.

Yea that's exactly why, I've had no reason ever to be interested in this site as I'm not into this medium, different strokes for different folks, plus I never thought I had anything worth putting before people that I didn't know before, unfortunately the impression of it that I am getting mainly from you is abysmal. All you're doing by posting up pms is trying to undermine my character, which when done through what is for you an anonymous medium is especially insulting as such I will not be posting any more on this site. If you want any further material please go to my facebook page(tomorrow) or approach me personally.
#oneofyou

Chavways

SpudWinkle wrote: »

What's the situation in terms of the two KC members effectively running together? I was under the impression candidates weren't meant to campaign as a team. Is it a case that they have completely different campaign teams or what?

They have different core campaign teams for definite. After that it'll just be people helping out their friends I'd say.

Jester252

SpudWinkle wrote: »

What's the situation in terms of the two KC members effectively running together? I was under the impression candidates weren't meant to campaign as a team. Is it a case that they have completely different campaign teams or what?

People can run together. It was done last year with KOB and David

wnolan1992

I think it may be important to point out at this juncture that the b1rd1stheword account has not yet been verified as James McMahon.

So I'd hold off on making any judgments (good or bad) based on anything that account posts until such time as it is verified.

Tighearnan

supackofidiots wrote: »

I would vote for cliodhna but I am not a big fan of the kayak club so unfortunately I will have to vote for ronan.

That seems a very silly way of picking who you are going to vote for. Also something tells me you have a problem with the SU ? So why do you care who is gonna win?

supackofidiots wrote: »

ah quincy come on lad, the video is appalling. would none of his mates have had a quiet word? Imagine going into him and asking for advice on sexual health? Poor lad looks like he has aspergers.

Theres no need for that carry on. But then after seeing his reply to you offering a helpful opinion, i couldnt be arsed trying to defend him.

b1rd1stheword wrote: »

Hi, I'm James Mc Mahon and the best way of getting to know me is to watch my campaign video's and read my manifesto which will be released into the wild tomorrow (hopefully) until then here's something I made earlier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccYptWD_tts

Seriously make a new video if you really want to win. The quality is terrible and the blooper at the end takes away from your message. ( Which seems like a good one)



Candidates working together can end either good or bad as it takes away from some peoples support base or bolsters others. It is allowed to happen.

Brother24

i think these suggestions of him making another video are a bit mad,

1. It'll defo go down as a ****-up if he takes it down
2. Its one day before the election starts, not enough time to make another good one, cos
3. if hes makes a second bad one thats him well and truly gone

Tighearnan

Brother24 wrote: »

i think these suggestions of him making another video are a bit mad,

1. It'll defo go down as a ****-up if he takes it down
2. Its one day before the election starts, not enough time to make another good one, cos
3. if hes makes a second bad one thats him well and truly gone

A video of him just stating his intentions without the terrible blooper at the end of the video will do him a world of good and would be done within the day.

Quintis

Tighearnan wrote: »

A video of him just stating his intentions without the terrible blooper at the end of the video will do him a world of good and would be done within the day.

The video is a good way of getting his name out there, plenty of time for a policy vid and TST interview to state policy

SpudWinkle

At least it wasn't a Harlem Shake video :P

CiaranMT

Quintis wrote: »

The video is a good way of getting his name out there, plenty of time for a policy vid and TST interview to state policy

TST will only be interviewing the presidential candidates. So I have heard at least, to be confirmed by someone involved with the site.

Quintis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qjsftq1wHn0

A truly cringe welfare video

CiaranMT

Christ.

SpudWinkle

I just puked a little in my mouth. Not good at all.

Catch15

Tough to look past the incumbents this year, history says they rarely lose out.

Just wondering though, I've seen a few campaign pages pop up on facebook and without looking to raise an issue or get him in trouble, is the McCoy guy allowed to use the McCoy's crisps logo? Was the rule changed after the Eamonn Horgan thing?

Quintis

Catch15 wrote: »

Tough to look past the incumbents this year, history says they rarely lose out.

Just wondering though, I've seen a few campaign pages pop up on facebook and without looking to raise an issue or get him in trouble, is the McCoy guy allowed to use the McCoy's crisps logo? Was the rule changed after the Eamonn Horgan thing?

All FB pages, posters, stickers etc. have to be approved before they can be officially distributed or as in the case of FB uploaded, so I'd say we have to give him the benefit of the doubt or else he is in violation of the rules and at risk of losing his deposit as I understand it

http://www.ulsu.ie/news/surepresentativejobs

The guidelines are available here, rule 4.3 covers the issue, all promotional materials must first be approved by the returning officer

Catch15

Quintis wrote: »

All FB pages, posters, stickers etc. have to be approved before they can be officially distributed or as in the case of FB uploaded, so I'd say we have to give him the benefit of the doubt or else he is in violation of the rules and at risk of losing his deposit as I understand it

Someone would want to tell him to rethink his t-shirts so...

Polar Ice

People have previously used modifications of the Carlsberg logo and duff beer

Brother24

Logos can be used, however they must be altered in some way to not look 100%.

It's early yet, but anyone want to have a guess at what the final results will be? Seeing as this is before their campaign starts, it might be better judged who's on the backfoot at the minute really,

Welfare
I can see Cathal doing it again, hes got a big personality, and after a turbulent few days for James, it will be interesting to see how he bounces back from it. No sign of his other competitor Catriona, although she has the backing of KC, who are always strong at campaigning. Unless a big campaign from the newbies, Cathal will get a second term.

Academic
Paddy is the clear favorite here, with a pretty good year under his belt. Darragh is on exec, and will have good detailed policies for sure, and has already started his campaign with a good motto and logo,but unless his campaign is big and flashy, Paddys experience of campaigning will surely pull it for him this time.

President
This seems to be the most open this year, and probably the sabbat with the least chance or re-election, due to his non-appearance all last year. However, he is by far the most recognisable, and the others have a big jump to catch him, however, easily done with lollipops. It will also be hard for him to convince the students during the course of the week that he is deserving of another semester, however, he's a hell of a politican. Rob and Emma are probably the two least known candidates, but Emma has the formidable KC backing her. Tim and Kennedy were both nominated for Best Individual for Societies, and while Tim will be recognised somewhat for Mock UL and Scholar comedy shows, Kennedy has the backing of the International Society and masses of those always-eager international students. Too close to call I reckon, but I can see it coming down to a two, possibly three horse race in the end. And I reckon it will be Moursy, and at least one of either Tim or Kennedy, as Emma's backing strength will be divided in two, of course, this is all depending on who has the best sweeties.

Thoughts?

Quintis

I think whichever candidate can get those who normally wouldn't vote, i.e. first years or Co-Op and erasmus students to cast a vote would have a great chance. Last years turnout was very poor to say the least (not just a problem in UL as clearly seen in the bare 10% turnout in UCD for their recent referendum). So if one or more of the lesser known candidates can excite interest in those who normally wouldn't vote then it could become a very tight and interesting race with the strong possibility of upsetting the incumbents

sceptre

Mod note:

Posting private messages without the permission of the sender is a no-no. You might see it as relevant to the election (and it may well be) but it still isn't something that we do. Yeah, you can read that as "something that isn#t permitted".

I've deleted four consecutive posts that included a link to the private message that shouldn't have been posted. They don't get posted on boards.ie without permission of the sender. Bit of cop-on, people, it's easier than it seems. I don't like deleting posts, you don't like having them deleted, I prefer to limit such deletions to legal requirements and gross abuse where a legal requirement kicks in. Help me to keep idiocy off the list of reasons I need to delete anything, thanks.

/mod

sceptre

Honestly though, that's a really awful video. Unless it gets much better after thirty seconds. It's better than the one from the UCC guy but that's not anything to encourage amateur film-makers or political marketeers as the UCC one comes across as even more of a deliberate attempt at wholesale murder of brain cells. I reckon Tighearnan's right in that a simple video saying what someone wants to do is at least worthwhile. Cheap, not necessarily cheerful but effective in its purpose. It looks rather bad when someone tries to be clever with their video and so dramatically fails. Despite what marketroids would tell you, not all attention is good. With that in mind, the UCC one is actually better - it passes the Great Spider Invasion test in that people might make it through more than thirty seconds of it (I didn't). It''s not doing him any favours. Four days left though, that's lots of time.

With regard to the use of trademarked logos, I think we'd all be a little surprised at how many candidates annually demonstrate their inability to read the rules before (or after) committing to the rules. Typically there's at least one person who has a massive campaign planned using the logo of an established company, fails to get it approved by the returning officer and then has to trash the entire campaign, finding themselves left with a campaign based on personality which they may or may not have. I've not seen a single one this year so have no idea if this applies to any candidate or any candidate in particular. There's generally one though who spends half of Monday asking just how much they have to change their campaign identity until it's acceptable.

Cynic that I am (and by "cynic" in this case I mean "anti-bribery democrat"), the sweets and other methods of temporarily making people interested in micro-territory democracy (usually known as "student politics") really can put one or two candidates in the position where they can effectively buy votes. It's easy to claim that they're paying the prospective voter for their listening time rather than their vote but, being realistic, as a chunk of people have little or no interest and are purchasable for thirty seconds with a lollipop, it doesn't particularly add anything to the democratic process and, arguably, perverts it. Now, any candidate who attempts to win an SU election without such minor bribes and enticements is probably going to lose so this isn't a change that will come via the candidates - no candidate can be blamed for using sweets as an attraction while every other candidate does. Or there's always the alternative of campaign spending limits and if people want to spend all of their money on sugar, that's their own beeswax. It's moot for this election as it's already begun. I'd say that there isn't much of a difference between handing someone a lollipop and just handing them the money though.

Quintis wrote: »

I think whichever candidate can get those who normally wouldn't vote, i.e. first years or Co-Op and erasmus students to cast a vote would have a great chance. Last years turnout was very poor to say the least (not just a problem in UL as clearly seen in the bare 10% turnout in UCD for their recent referendum). So if one or more of the lesser known candidates can excite interest in those who normally wouldn't vote then it could become a very tight and interesting race with the strong possibility of upsetting the incumbents

Absolutely. But it almost never happens.