As many of you already know, the voter turn-out was situated between 1.8 and 2.4% today. Everything indicates that roughly 4% (or less) of students will end up electing the next President of the SFUO. Correction, 2-3% of students will crown the next President, as the other 1% or so will be divided among the other candidates.Depressing.
How about this. 1000 students will end up voting, if that many. That means if every unique visitor of this blog were to vote for one candidate, that candidate would win. Even stranger, if all of Dean Haldenby's "friends" on Facebook were to go out and vote, it would probably suffice to give him a majority. To put it another way, Ryan Kennery has more friends on Facebook than the SFUO will have students voting for the next President of the SFUO. There are Engineering classes that have more students than the number of votes the next President of the SFUO will receive. The analogies are endless.
The responsibility for this perversion of democracy can be attributed to one party--the SFUO.
It is a lazy, outdated, stuck in the 90s, status quo organization. There was no revolution this year. There is still a "clique", even though that "clique" has changed, there remains no vision. The posters the SFUO prints are Microsoft Paint™ black boxes with "VOTE" written in white. It's 2008, not 1985 (the year Microsoft Paint™ came out).
There are no Facebook ads encouraging students to vote nor is there a cohesive website accessible to all students. There was a shortened campaign, limiting the number of classroom presentations candidates would be able to to. The election rules are outdated. Students (other than the candidates) should be paid to do classroom presentations. There should be students (other than candidates' volunteers) that are paid to stop people and encourage them to vote. There should be emails sent through the listserv of the University (and the SFUO) with the platforms of all candidates with details regarding where/when students can vote.
We did a fucking Rock the Vote for the Ontario Elections. Am I the only one to see a contradiction here? What the fuck am I missing? Let's bring Nas to encourage students to vote for Electoral reform, but oh heaven forbid we bring someone in to encourage students to vote in their own student elections.
We accept low voter turn out. We do not challenge it. We will send a bus to Louisiana to protest against Stephen Harper and George W. Bush. We will spend roughly $20,000 to bring in David Suzuki for a Green Week, but we will only spend $30,000 for an entire election.
How about bringing Suzuki during the elections? And here is an idea; Put a ballot box outside of the auditorium where he is set to speak. Here is a better idea; Reduce the cost of the ticket if students vote, and vote in any way they choose. Even if they choose to spoil their ballot. Even if they choose to show up to explain why they do not want to vote. It does not matter.
Why not do events during Elections week? Real events. Keynote speakers. Why not bring in Ministers? Former SFUO Presidents like Hugh Segal or Allan Rock? Why not take these elections seriously?
Is it really the candidates' responsibility to promote these elections? How does that make sense?
Yes, it is a by-election, and yes, there was a 12% voter turn-out for the general election. That was 12%, with a U-Pass referendum, a Women's Resource Centre referendum and an Ombudsman referendum. And maybe students are satisfied. Maybe, just maybe, there is no real debate and nothing ever changes, so why vote?
I would argue that even that 12% is an inflated number. It is inflated because of those referendum questions. Had we taken out the U-Pass, the voter turn-out would have been even lower. And explain to any student that JWR2 plans on removing levies on OPIRG or shutting down a student bar that loses $80,000 annually, and you will receive reactions like "What is OPIRG? There is a student bar?"
We are light-years away from having a respectable voter turnout, because we are light years away from having informed voters.
Here is another revolutionary idea. Having candidates do the same classes at the same time. Have 10-15 minute debates at the beginning of each class presentation. Is that too much to spare? Really? Why? Don't we take 15 minutes to "evaluate" the Professors at least once per semester? How would this be different? Heck, do it during that same week.
Oh, but that would be unfair for those students who prepared a list of class presentations. Fuck it. The Elections Office should give a list of all classrooms to all candidates.
The reality is that the current system benefits the incumbents, the front-runners, the establishment. Put a discrete ad the size of a button in the bottom corner page of the Fulcrum explaining to students that they have until next week to run a "No" campaign, and then act surprised that no one chose to run a "No" campaign. Get a low voter turn-out, thus allowing 1500 involved students the ability to decide for 30 000, and complain that the turn-out was so low.
How about that Campaigns' committee? Remember that Campaigns' committee that felt it was important to promote the referendum on electoral reform? Or the Campaigns' committee that feels it is important to support the Aboriginal day of action? Or that Campaigns' committee that is against a North American SPP? Where the fuck is this Campaigns' committee during these elections? And remember that Promo Team?
Members of the executive happily do classroom presentations (during their paid hours) to encourage students to vote YES for a referendum question. Where the fuck are these very SFUO executive members encouraging students to vote? Pam Hrick, President of the SFUO, was doing it gladly for the U-Pass. I guess that was more important than getting students to vote. François Picard, VP Communications, was doing it for Maher Arar and David Suzuki, I guess they were more important than the SFUO Elections. Seamus Wolfe, VP University Affairs, will grab a microphone any chance he gets. His job is to get students involved and aware of the campaigns the SFUO runs. How about using your portfolio to promote... oh I don't know... The SFUO elections? And where the fuck is Julie Séguin's, VP Communications-elect "Orange Machine"? Séguin said, on-air, that she wanted turn-out to be at least 20%. I do not want to single out any one person. But I want to show how everyone is hypocritical on this issue.
There are over 150 student funded clubs at the SFUO, or roughly 5000 students. These groups are a "branch" of the SFUO. Where is the outreach to get clubs involved? Why not organise contests to groups that get the most original campaign for students to vote?
Oh and wait. *DRAMA*. Electronic voting? Oh yes. That winter of 2004 when 150 students voted electronically and their votes were not counted, thus forcing the Elections Office to call another election. Seriously? Can we not get over this issue already?
This executive, this BOA, these Federated bodies, this Elections Office are all either incompetent, lazy or satisfied with the status quo.
The SFUO will invalidate a referendum result if it receives less than 5%. But there is no rule stating what we should do if there is less than 5% turn-out for an actual election. Basic logic would dictate we invalidate these elections and call a new round. But everyone is tired of elections. They are expensive, they are exhausting and why does it matter anyways? Dean Haldenby will win.
This will become another SFUO folk-legend. Just like that year we did another election because of the electronic votes, or that year Pam Hrick won by three votes, or that year only 3% of students voted. Good laughs all around.
It really does not matter anyways. Seamus Wolfe, Danika Brisson and Roxanne Dubois, all elected to next year's executive felt that we should not raise the minimum voter turnout rule.Wolfe thought that the 5% rule applied to candidates as well as referendums. I mean, why should they want to raise the minimum voter turnout? They got elected, they're satisfied with the status quo.
By this time tomorrow, the few hundred students at the 1848 will complain about the low-voter turn-out, drink a beer to Dean's name, and blame the Elections Office for everything that went wrong. Then, we will see the exact same thing happen next year.
Graphic courtesy of Jason Chiu. The SFUO2 Blog™ exclusive.
P.S. I am already saturated by the immature, unintelligent and partisan comments I am getting on this blog. Especially from "anonymous". For this reason, I have changed the settings to the comments section. My apologies to those wishing to remain as anonymous as possible. If you do wish to comment but are unwilling to create a Google account, you can email me at sfuo@wassim.ca and I will add your comment to the post.
UPDATE, 17h18: I just got spammed by the SFUO. When I saw the email was from the SFUO/FÉUO, I figured, wow. They're encouraging students to vote! Well done SFUO, well done. (Spam below)
PANDAMONIUM Returns!
The SFUO and The Carleton University Students’ Association team up to bring you the show of the year.
Featuring The Roots, illScarlett and guests. Tickets go on sale Friday for $10 at the SFUO offices (UCU 07 and SITE 0101).
Civic Centre, March 31, 2008.
It is a lazy, outdated, stuck in the 90s, status quo organization. There was no revolution this year. There is still a "clique", even though that "clique" has changed, there remains no vision. The posters the SFUO prints are Microsoft Paint™ black boxes with "VOTE" written in white. It's 2008, not 1985 (the year Microsoft Paint™ came out).
There are no Facebook ads encouraging students to vote nor is there a cohesive website accessible to all students. There was a shortened campaign, limiting the number of classroom presentations candidates would be able to to. The election rules are outdated. Students (other than the candidates) should be paid to do classroom presentations. There should be students (other than candidates' volunteers) that are paid to stop people and encourage them to vote. There should be emails sent through the listserv of the University (and the SFUO) with the platforms of all candidates with details regarding where/when students can vote.
We did a fucking Rock the Vote for the Ontario Elections. Am I the only one to see a contradiction here? What the fuck am I missing? Let's bring Nas to encourage students to vote for Electoral reform, but oh heaven forbid we bring someone in to encourage students to vote in their own student elections.
We accept low voter turn out. We do not challenge it. We will send a bus to Louisiana to protest against Stephen Harper and George W. Bush. We will spend roughly $20,000 to bring in David Suzuki for a Green Week, but we will only spend $30,000 for an entire election.
How about bringing Suzuki during the elections? And here is an idea; Put a ballot box outside of the auditorium where he is set to speak. Here is a better idea; Reduce the cost of the ticket if students vote, and vote in any way they choose. Even if they choose to spoil their ballot. Even if they choose to show up to explain why they do not want to vote. It does not matter.
Why not do events during Elections week? Real events. Keynote speakers. Why not bring in Ministers? Former SFUO Presidents like Hugh Segal or Allan Rock? Why not take these elections seriously?
Is it really the candidates' responsibility to promote these elections? How does that make sense?
Yes, it is a by-election, and yes, there was a 12% voter turn-out for the general election. That was 12%, with a U-Pass referendum, a Women's Resource Centre referendum and an Ombudsman referendum. And maybe students are satisfied. Maybe, just maybe, there is no real debate and nothing ever changes, so why vote?
I would argue that even that 12% is an inflated number. It is inflated because of those referendum questions. Had we taken out the U-Pass, the voter turn-out would have been even lower. And explain to any student that JWR2 plans on removing levies on OPIRG or shutting down a student bar that loses $80,000 annually, and you will receive reactions like "What is OPIRG? There is a student bar?"
We are light-years away from having a respectable voter turnout, because we are light years away from having informed voters.
Here is another revolutionary idea. Having candidates do the same classes at the same time. Have 10-15 minute debates at the beginning of each class presentation. Is that too much to spare? Really? Why? Don't we take 15 minutes to "evaluate" the Professors at least once per semester? How would this be different? Heck, do it during that same week.
Oh, but that would be unfair for those students who prepared a list of class presentations. Fuck it. The Elections Office should give a list of all classrooms to all candidates.
The reality is that the current system benefits the incumbents, the front-runners, the establishment. Put a discrete ad the size of a button in the bottom corner page of the Fulcrum explaining to students that they have until next week to run a "No" campaign, and then act surprised that no one chose to run a "No" campaign. Get a low voter turn-out, thus allowing 1500 involved students the ability to decide for 30 000, and complain that the turn-out was so low.
How about that Campaigns' committee? Remember that Campaigns' committee that felt it was important to promote the referendum on electoral reform? Or the Campaigns' committee that feels it is important to support the Aboriginal day of action? Or that Campaigns' committee that is against a North American SPP? Where the fuck is this Campaigns' committee during these elections? And remember that Promo Team?
Members of the executive happily do classroom presentations (during their paid hours) to encourage students to vote YES for a referendum question. Where the fuck are these very SFUO executive members encouraging students to vote? Pam Hrick, President of the SFUO, was doing it gladly for the U-Pass. I guess that was more important than getting students to vote. François Picard, VP Communications, was doing it for Maher Arar and David Suzuki, I guess they were more important than the SFUO Elections. Seamus Wolfe, VP University Affairs, will grab a microphone any chance he gets. His job is to get students involved and aware of the campaigns the SFUO runs. How about using your portfolio to promote... oh I don't know... The SFUO elections? And where the fuck is Julie Séguin's, VP Communications-elect "Orange Machine"? Séguin said, on-air, that she wanted turn-out to be at least 20%. I do not want to single out any one person. But I want to show how everyone is hypocritical on this issue.
There are over 150 student funded clubs at the SFUO, or roughly 5000 students. These groups are a "branch" of the SFUO. Where is the outreach to get clubs involved? Why not organise contests to groups that get the most original campaign for students to vote?
Oh and wait. *DRAMA*. Electronic voting? Oh yes. That winter of 2004 when 150 students voted electronically and their votes were not counted, thus forcing the Elections Office to call another election. Seriously? Can we not get over this issue already?
This executive, this BOA, these Federated bodies, this Elections Office are all either incompetent, lazy or satisfied with the status quo.
The SFUO will invalidate a referendum result if it receives less than 5%. But there is no rule stating what we should do if there is less than 5% turn-out for an actual election. Basic logic would dictate we invalidate these elections and call a new round. But everyone is tired of elections. They are expensive, they are exhausting and why does it matter anyways? Dean Haldenby will win.
This will become another SFUO folk-legend. Just like that year we did another election because of the electronic votes, or that year Pam Hrick won by three votes, or that year only 3% of students voted. Good laughs all around.
It really does not matter anyways. Seamus Wolfe, Danika Brisson and Roxanne Dubois, all elected to next year's executive felt that we should not raise the minimum voter turnout rule.Wolfe thought that the 5% rule applied to candidates as well as referendums. I mean, why should they want to raise the minimum voter turnout? They got elected, they're satisfied with the status quo.
By this time tomorrow, the few hundred students at the 1848 will complain about the low-voter turn-out, drink a beer to Dean's name, and blame the Elections Office for everything that went wrong. Then, we will see the exact same thing happen next year.
Graphic courtesy of Jason Chiu. The SFUO2 Blog™ exclusive.
P.S. I am already saturated by the immature, unintelligent and partisan comments I am getting on this blog. Especially from "anonymous". For this reason, I have changed the settings to the comments section. My apologies to those wishing to remain as anonymous as possible. If you do wish to comment but are unwilling to create a Google account, you can email me at sfuo@wassim.ca and I will add your comment to the post.
UPDATE, 17h18: I just got spammed by the SFUO. When I saw the email was from the SFUO/FÉUO, I figured, wow. They're encouraging students to vote! Well done SFUO, well done. (Spam below)
PANDAMONIUM Returns!
The SFUO and The Carleton University Students’ Association team up to bring you the show of the year.
Featuring The Roots, illScarlett and guests. Tickets go on sale Friday for $10 at the SFUO offices (UCU 07 and SITE 0101).
Civic Centre, March 31, 2008.
36 comments:
Okay, it is obvious that something needs to be done with this electoral dysfunction... jokes aside, this is a serious issue-- from speaking with both JRW2 and RPG, I think they, along with myself, DPH (I had to use that once) will all agree that there is a problem here. I was actually shocked to hear about the turnout earlier today... I know we, the candidates, have all been working hard to try and get the votes out. I know that this challenge needs to be dealt with ASAP and will when one of us is elected--this we all agree on! This failure to attain a respectable voter turnout is unacceptable and I do not think that we can blame it on apathy this time. I have actually stopped talking about my platform and started talking about voting...
NOW, STOP READING WHAT I AM WRITING AND GO VOTE!
Hm voyons, qui est l'hypocrite ici, monsieur super téteu depuis que Julie a gagné les élections... c'est quand même rassurant que t'es pas complètement téteu.
Julie était partie aux Jeux de la Communication à Trois-Rivière pendant 4 jours (plus 1, stuck dans neige...). Elle a pris le temps de se rattrapper dans ses devoirs et ses heures au travail. Give her a break.
The SFUO exec have agreed to remain neutral, with good reason (cliques?). And for all I know, Julie's mandate starts in May, there is still a VP Comm for the SFUO somewhere who get paid to do something...
Catou
People don't like criticism about the elections, which is something that I learned this year. They run smoothly, but that is the only real positive.
I can only hope that the SFUO Executive, and their marketing department (who were too slow/lazy/unaware to even update the elections site) are catching the hint. That the campaigns team does something that will actually directly benefit students, which is to encourage them to vote in their own direct election.
Maybe, just maybe, I am going out on a limb to say that if we vote in our own elections here at the university we might be more inclined to start caring about politics municipally, provincially, and nationally. But this could just be a pipedream of a political science student.
I'm glad that someone posted this rant, and I'm equally glad it had as many expletives as I'd use to describe the situation.
The way I see it is that the Elections Office itself needs to take on a new role. This isn't to knock Sylvia, because she ran the Elections Office very effectively at the job it has been doing for god knows how long (at least as long as I've been here). But, if I were not involved at some level I probably would not vote (much like first year, when I failed to see why it was necessary). And, the SFUO Executive had better realize that they have a responsibility to ensure that students are voting.
Is there no correlation between voting in an organization and caring about said organization? Is it truly apathy, a desire to know it is happening but not take part?
The one point where I differ from Wassim is on the 'light years'. I think we are only a few years away if we make a concerted effort. But, if we retain the statu quo why bother measuring it all.
This should not be seen as offensive to those parties responsible. It should be seen as a wakeup call.
Are we so easily discouraged the online voting debacle of 2004 that we've shut the idea down?
How about instead of giving laptops to scrutineers to make sure people haven't voted twice, we use the program they've got to make some sort of voting program. Why not set up computers instead of polling stations to get people to vote. Why not try to put it online again? Why do we use Facebook so often, and not connect the hours of time wasted there to a way to get people to vote. I'm not saying that Facebook would be the location the voting would take place, but figure if every person messaged their friends at the school with a link to a website, would that not get more votes? Would writing a website on a blackboard in class not get students with laptops to visit the site in class?
Probably, yes.
So hey, comp sci students, anyone who is computer-literate, or anyone up for the challenge. Figure this one out.
On the other hand, considering the apathy of many students, if it fails, I'm sure the majority of the school won't even be aware that a re-voting happened...
I was also looking into other electoral systems and noted how the Université de Moncton and other universities have an online voting system. Im not quite sure what the voter turnout there is, but Im almost positive it is considerably higher. It basically consists of going onto your infoweb account and voting for who you want to be on the next executive. Maybe this wouldn't be possible here at the University of Ottawa, but we should definitely look into a better system.
How about the Elections Office having a campaigns team where the said team would only be focused on getting the word out and promoting the hell out of it like they did in Nova Scotia? I think that the SFUO campaigns team is criticized too much because their job is already a bit overloaded with other events. However, having a separate team dedicated entirely to the elections would definitely help.
On the other hand, lets not forget that this is a by-election, which generally tend to have less attendance. Its definitely not an excuse, especially when you consider the nature of the position being contested, but its definitely a contributing factor, one which we can take into consideration when we further evaluate the situation in the course of the next year.
I would therefore say, lets sit down, over the next few months and create a consultation committee where we can lay out every possible solution and go from there. I think that Wassim has probably stated a considerable amount of possibilities.
FInally, the voter apathy argument is definitely one that needs to be away. We need constructive criticism, such as Wassim puts forward. We need to find out why, students don't care and not just say "they don't care" and leave it as is. I walk on campus and here students saying "What's the SFUO?" all the time. We need to promote, promote, promote. Though I clearly supported Picard, I do think that Julie's vision of SFUO communications will actually bring a change. We have endless possibilities to change things and by starting early... even before these elections are done... we could have a big impact at next year's election, one that could be bigger than we think.
OR you could let joke candidates run. Look what happened to voter turnout in UBC and Alberta. Voter turnout went to 27%ish!
On the point of online voting, I only think it would bring the voter turnout up if it was also accompanied by regular polling stations. I think the presence of polling stations around the University is an essential way to remind people to vote.
However, not having been around during the previous debacle, I don't know if this is what was done.
I have some disappointing news. Upon announcing during the PIDSSA elections that the SFUO voter turnout was somewhere between 1.8-2.4% most people found it a) funny, or b) uninteresting.
The only person that seemed disappointing/disgusted was the professor. Keep in mind, this is a political science class at the 2000 level.
I completely agree with Sam, that a campaign team NEEDS to be dedicated to the elections. Next year needs to be the year to turn it around. If voter turnout drops any further, it will be only the candidates themselves who are casting ballots.
Great post? Or... greatest?
À ne pas oublier : la FÉUO est une fédération étudiante…la réalité d’une fédération étudiante ou jeunesse c’est qu’elle change à tous les 4 ans ou presque. On peut mettre les mandats des exécutifs à 2 ans, de permettre aux candidat.e.s de faire campagne en groupe, on peut tout mettre en place pour que la FÉUO soit plus crédible, ait des positions et des mandats clairs, mais, au bout du compte, on doit se souvenir qu’elle doit refléter la réalité des jeunes et du corps étudiant – c’est ce qui fait d’elle une fédération jeunesse.
Cela dit, ce taux de participation est déplorable. Je crois que la responsabilité de faire sortir le vote sort du cadre du rôle des candidat.e.s – c’est vrai que c’est une formule qui avantage les candidats qui se représentent et qui désavantage l’étudiant.e moyen.ne qui prend 5 cours et qui travaille en plus. De mettre des mécanismes en place pour faire sortir le vote lors des élections, c’est une mesure nécessaire et obligatoire.
Plus encore, ce que je propose c’est qu’on a un travail massif à faire pour que les étudiant.e.s soient au courant de toutes les instances où ils peuvent avoir un impact sur les décisions qui se prennent à tous les paliers, et ce, dès qu’ils arrivent en première année. C’est trop tard de comprendre le système lorsqu’on est en quatrième année, et pourtant, c’est ce qui se passe, et c’est en partie pourquoi le taux de participation est bas (aux élections, à la vie étudiante, etc). Plusieurs d’entre nous revenons aux études, et c’est maintenant qu’on comprend comment on peut avoir un impact. Si au moins la FÉUO peut s’assurer qu’année après année, les étudiant.e.s soient représenté.e.s dans tous les comités imaginables sur le campus, qu’on réussit à parler ouvertement à l’administration et qu’on participe à un processus ouvert et démocratique tout au long de l’année plutôt que seulement en période électorale, alors on aura vaincu l’establishment et je crois que la FÉUO sera un peu plus près du rôle qu’elle devrait assumer pour représenter les étudiant.e.s.
Wow. A lot of great ideas for outreach are in this post. But it also pointed a lot of fingers.
If no one follows up on this, nothing will change next year. And a few years down the road, when the core of currently active students has turned over completely, all of these ideas will be forgotten.
Might this post, and the resulting debate, spark an organized movement to reform SFUO elections promotion strategies?
Go for it.
Julie Séguin is still VP Communications for Arts and with our own elections going and Arts ball around the corner, she is a little busy with her current commitments. She is not the type of person to drop everything Arts because she was elected to the SFUO. She is working very hard to improve the Arts voter turnout which is even more pathetic than the SFUO turnout. I realise that you may not find the Arts elections as important or as interesting as the SFUO elections but they matter to us, specially since we have three presidential candidates and 2 other races.
Ce serait peut-être une bonne idée que le bureau des élections engage un(e) responsable des communications.
La DGÉ n'a pas le temps de faire cela.
I am not sure I want to support online voting, at least for one reason.
Polling stations are controlled... you can't have candidates campaigning around them, you can't have posters around them, etc. Most people here would agree these rules make sense.
Now, with online voting, all campus, if not the whole world, becomes a polling station. See, this is not about whether the online system is reliable or not (it can be), but what people will do on elections day to get votes (I can already see candidates going around with laptops to get students to log in to Infoweb and vote for them.)
Présentement, à la GSAÉD, les candidat(e)s ne peuvent pas faire campagne du tout durant la période de scrutin. La FÉUO le permet loin des bureaux de scrutin. Est-ce que vous voudriez vraiment que les étudiant.e.s se fassent harceler lors des jours de scrutin pour aller sur Infoweb et voter, par un candidat (ou une candidate, ou un(e) de ses bénévoles).
I understand some students might vote at a distance, and it should be an exception granted to students off campus, not the rule.
Basically, I say we should not sacrifice legitimacy for voter turnout. If students on campus do not care about their student associations enough to walk 2 minutes to a polling station, maybe wait 2 minutes in line, and vote, then that's the problem, and online voting only tries to hide it.
Le commentaire sur le fait que la formule actuelle favorise les gens qui sont déjà impliqués est aussi douteux, pour la simple raison qu'ils seront avantagés peu importe la formule.
Pour ce qui est de donner une liste de toutes les classes à tous les candidat.e.s, cette liste existe déjà:
- www.timetable.uottawa.ca
Mais Wassim, veux-tu dire une liste des grandes classes seulement? Le bureau des élections le faisait déjà quand je me suis présenté en 2006... mais attendons, est-ce que faire les grandes classes signifie qu'on rejoint le plus de gens? NON, parce que les grandes classes sont surtout en 1re année et surtout dans certaines facultés (Sciences, Sciences sociales, Sciences de la santé).
The elections office cannot compile a "good class list" simply because I expect there would be disagreements on what a good class list will be. For Lower Tuition I took hours compiling class lists, balancing coverage vs. time-efficiency vs. non-redundancy vs. targeting students and profs more likely to be sympathetic to the message.
Making class lists is part of the art of campaigning, just as banners. Do you want the elections office to start making banners for candidates? Why would the elections office help candidates on one part of the campaign and not another?
Par rapport aux votes online!
1) Je crois que c'est une idée géniale, même s'il faut créer/réviser toutes les règlements des élections.
2) J'aurais bien aimé pouvoir voter en ligne l'an passé quand j'étais à Bruxelles! Quelques centaines d'étudiants partent en échange étudiant dans un autre pays à chaque semestre. Ce sont quand même des étudiants de l'université d'Ottawa et ils reviennent l'année suivante en tant que membres de la nouvelle FÉUO. En plus, s'ils sont assez fonceurs pour partir en échange, ils sont probablement aussi impliqués au niveau de la communauté étudiante.
Wassim, tu est un exemple à suivre. Ton dévouement aux élections a été incroyable et je crois que ce billet exprime des positions justes.
J'ai hâte que tu puisses enfin retrouver la vie normal, tu en as fait tellement sans grande reconnaissance. Chapeau.
Je suis tout d'affait d'Accord qu'appart les médias, ce blog et les candidats rien n'est fait pour promouvoir les élections.
La FÉUO fait plein d'événement pour des causes qui ne touche pas directement la population étudiante (Rock pour le vote, Panda monium et oui c'est de retour...?, speakers series, etc.)
Je suis tout d'affait d'accord que pour la prochaine élection il faut créer un campagne de publicité (plus que des affiches, c'est-à-dire plusieurs différents média et façon de publicisé l'événement)
Des présentations de classe avant et pendant les élections, faire plus que un débat, avoir des jokes candidates, changer les affiches et le look des la promo des élections, avoir des guess speaker, etc.
Aussi, il faut avoir un bureau des élections qui est plus proactif et non réactif. Si il faut un plus gros budget et bien .... n'a t'il pas un sur plus a la FÉUO? Peut-on mettre un coût a la démocratie?
Cette année 4 employer pour une élection qui présente 30 000 étudiants? Et je ne vais pas embarquer dans le débats de cette année parce que je ne saurait pas quand terminé.
Donc, pourquoi mettre les dates des élections dans l'agenda, dans le calendrier de CLS dans le site web et ce fameux calendrier des événements. JE crois qu'un priorité de la nouvelle VP-Communication serrait de créer un plan de communication pour les élections.
Aussi ce qui serrait intéressant c'est qu'il n'y ait pas d'autres élections sur campus lors de celle de la FÉUO pour éviter la confusion.
JE crois que j'ai assé dit
DONC, ALLEZ VOTEZ!
N'oublions pas les gens qui sont en coop qui ne peuvent pas voté. Nous avons du en détourné quand j'étais scrutateur il y a 3 ans parce que le bureau de scrutin fermait.
HAHA! Serge speller "voter" wrong!!!
VOTER VOTER VOTER!!!
HAHA JESS SPELLERS!!!
HAHA YOU ARE A DOUCHEBAG!!!
Here's whats going on in the UCU today: a perspective from a worker at the Centre for Students with Disabilities.
Having to go from the second floor down to the concourse to the fed office, I pass through the Tim Hortons barricade, take the stairs down and end up on the concourse.
Right in front of the Tim Hortons line there is a voting booth. This is hidden by the Hortons line. And those in the Hortons line rarely walk away with their cuppa and vote.
Now, I take this journey perhaps 5 or 6 times a day. On the concourse in between the stairs and the fed office, there is a perfume booth, a womens razor promotion, some other booth, and a voting booth.
The "other" booth I have been avoiding eye contact with all day. They aggressively step out at me and I say "No thanks" every time. On the more business-centric booth days, I avoid eye contact with every booth whether they are trying to sell me something or not. I am just not in the mood to be hawked and solicited 5 or 6 times a day, but it happens anyways.
Now I'm not going to say this is how it is for everyone, but I am going to posit that as far as the UCU experience goes, when there are people hawking you to buy perfumes, to shave your legs, to stand around and be sold something, it is a direct disinclination to actually spend any unnecessary time in the UCU.
I barely noticed that there was a SCAW booth, and a booth giving out free Qurans. I would stop and talk to both of these groups, but I just avoid contact on days like these.
That people walking by can barely see the voting booth across from Tim Hortons because of the line is also a bit silly.
Of course, these arent the only voter booths, and I dont know if there is any correlation at all. I just feel that when the student centre feels more like a bazaar, I dont think I'm the only one who avoids eye contact and taking a look around.
Ban businesses on voting days from the UCU.
very interesting stuff.
Jeeze, Wassim...I thought you were gonna blog. Way to slack off...
I am disapointed.
I agree with the comments about the polling booths not being visible. It's more of an effort to locate the booth than it is to actually vote in the cafeteria and the UCU. No polling station in the RezComplex for the by-elections?
I had to actively search in SITE for a booth, expecting to find it in the heavily-used cafeteria. Instead, it's below in the largely-bypassed open area, divided the more visible from KIOSK 5 by pillars.
But this is also acknowledging that we, those of us who speak of low visibility, are already committed voters.
Not that blinking lights would fix what Wassims talking about, but it is definitely something.
Is there a particular reason why the scrutineers at the voting tables can't "promote" the elections from where they're sitting? "Hey you! Have you voted yet? Ça ne prend qu'une minu... bonne journée!"
Mettons qu'avec une affiche noire et blanche et deux bénévoles muets, la table de vote fait effectivement pas de la grosse compétition aux tables de parfums, rasoirs et bijoux cheaps...
I know at RGN I didn’t even know where the voting booth was as I expected to find it outside the student lounge, and instead it is in the atrium, which is rarely visited by students. Most students thought that there wasn’t even a voting booth at the campus and were upset by this.
omg!! Catou! I was just typing that at the same time! (stupid new login lol)
they should be able to call out to people walking by and really draw attention to the station as everyone has the blinders on.
And if the election office is doing class presentations, they should really try to work in how much students are already investing into the SFUO. Maybe it'll get attention. The presentation could go something like this:
"Hello my name is so-and-so and I am running for the position of President of YOUR student federation! If elected I will install a hot tub in the SFUO office, take a 4 month vacation to Thailand, and then I will use the extra cash to bath in...oh! and the rest to hire and pay my friends. Vote for me!"
If people's ears don't perk up at that, they'll never listen to anything.
Interesting way to run elections:
http://www.electionsmcgill.ca/
They also run the elections for the faculties and such, if asked. They have a centralized online voting system. Also, all votes are entered into draws to win prizes!
Who We Are
Elections McGill is an independent and impartial agency of the Students' Society of McGill University (SSMU). We organize and carry out all SSMU elections and referenda. As the independent electoral agency of SSMU, we safeguard the integrity of the electoral process at McGill by enforcing the electoral regulations of the society.
The existence and independence of Elections McGill is mandated in the SSMU Constitution and By-Laws which explains that; "This organization shall be the sole body to administer the Society's elections and referenda."
What We Do
Elections McGill administrates the Salamander Voting System, an internet-based election application which is used to run all SSMU elections. OVS, as the system is known, has been used since 2003 as a secure, more accessible and environmentally friendly alternative to paper ballots. Since then, almost every faculty at McGill has adopted OVS for use in their own elections. We are also open to other faculties and campus groups that might want to solicit our services.
SSMU is known across Canada for having some of the most stringent and democratic electoral regulations in the country and Elections McGill is proud to do its part by upholding them.
I like the idea of having a separate entity, such as Elections Canada, which is entirely separate from Parliament. We could perhaps look into setting up such an initiative here on campus and having it run semester long during the winter semester to save on costs, but I'm sure the idea would be interesting.
However, one would have to argue that we should at least try other less expensive and expansive mesures to see if we can't boost up voter turn out without going to such costly extremes. We also need to keep in mind that each campus has their own makeup and that maybe we should look into combining various ideas.
"If no one follows up on this, nothing will change next year"
Anyone else up for committee-ing?
Les scrutateurs n'ont aucunement le droit de solliciter les étudiantes et étudiants de voter. D'après mon expérience x nombre d'années passées.
De plus, ils ne se font pas payer assez pour crier toute la journée afin que les gens votent...
Mais DONNES-LEURS DONT UN CAFÉ GRATUIT POUR VOTER! HA!
Post a Comment