Analysis: Ramirez claims vote count was manipulated

Following his fifth place finish, Alex Ramirez is claiming electoral fraud.

In a Feb. 3 post on his campaign site (which has since been taken down, but remains on Facebook), Ramirez claimed that the “vote count was manipulated” and that “far too many things happened during the campaign [for him] to have only generated 704 first place votes, and to have come in dead last.”

Ramirez claims his campaign team created “mass hysteria across campus,” and that they did too much to not have had more success in the election. He uses anecdotal evidence from the campaign period to support claims that someone deliberately manipulated election results.

Let us be clear: This is not an attempt to ‘bash’ Ramirez. His accusations are serious and inviting of criticism. Before they can be pursued further, three claims in Ramirez’s post-election blog must be examined.

1) Campaigning has a static formula to harvest votes

In addition to claiming his campaign created mass hysteria across campus, Ramirez lists the following pieces of ‘evidence’ to claim his relatively low, 704-vote total wasn’t realistically possible:

– There were 2,700 visits to his website on Feb. 1 and Feb. 2

– His team handed out 5,200 fliers

– A greet suit mascot “gathered a substantial amount of enthusiasm” for his campaign

Ramirez seems to believe that vote totals are simply the product of the time, energy and resources spent on campaigning. Never mind that every candidate also had websites, campaign materials and enthusiastic supporters (even if they’re not in green suits) that would have reached many of the same students as Ramirez’s team. His logic here excludes the following scenarios:

A) Students reviewed his campaign materials and disagreed with his platform proposals, or simply did not like his as much as another candidates’.

B) Students received his campaign materials and did not vote (66.6% of eligible voters did not vote)

In addition, Ramirez claims that on three separate occasions, “we received texts from people saying things like ‘Everybody I know has voted Alex, he has this in the bag.'”

Then, he offers up this quote: “I want all of you to know that this has nothing to do with losing, but the fact that I ended up with only 704 votes. Just using all the probabilities, it is literally impossible to have only gotten 704 first place votes.”

“Literally impossible.”

2) The Silhouette was part of the ‘manipulation’ and intentionally skewed coverage

The Silhouette has a proud tradition of editorial autonomy, separating its management and editorial content from any MSU body. Still, Ramirez claims we intentionally manipulated the vote by skewing our coverage of the all-candidates debate.

Ramirez also offers up this line: “For those of you that were at the debate, you all know [the Silhouette] couldn’t report the truth, because the story line would have been one line only – Ramirez dominated the debate.” Had we observed such a story line, we would have reported it.

He added that the Sil neglected to mention his closing speech, and the “deafening chants” that followed it. Those chants came exclusively from Ramirez’s small, but vocal campaign team. The planned stunt was, supposedly, reflective of a tide of support.

To insinuate that we intentionally disregarded the facts to manipulate the vote while providing only an obviously skewed first-hand account of the events as evidence is erroneous and insulting to our organization and staff.

3) Online voting opened the doors for easy manipulation of voting totals

Ramirez says that because the elections committee made a late, but pre-campaign period switch from paper to online balloting, it was evident that “they do not know when they themselves are being manipulated.”

There’s no mention of how the votes were actually manipulated, or how the tracks of a manipulated vote would have been covered up. There was the implication, though, that Ramirez was the target of conspiracy.

He then provides this ominous message: “Is this common practice in society? Because if this were the case in any election, in any part of the world, it would cause a scandal, and in some cases, civil wars.”

—

The reality of this situation is that a former MSU presidential candidate is making potentially libellous claims that an organization conspired against him – without providing any tangible evidence.

If there’s any manipulation involved, it’s from Ramirez’s unsupported claims that attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the MSU and its elections department.

Over the coming days, the Silhouette will investigate details surrounding the election, gathering information and evidence on the election’s procedures and its results.

– BD

Stewart wins 2012 MSU presidential election

47 votes have made Siobhan Stewart the MSU president-elect.

The fourth-year anthropology student won the presidential election in the early hours of Feb. 3, defeating competitors Chris Erl, David Campbell, Mukhtar Galan and Alex Ramirez.

“I don’t know what to think right now. I can’t process this right now,” said Stewart, clearly overwhelmed by the emotion of the win. The president-elect was contacted at her student house, joined by members of her team.

Stewart won with 3,119 votes in the fourth round of voting after Ramirez, Galan and Erl were eliminated. Her total was 47 more than Campbell’s 3,072 in the final round. The results were as follows:

1. Siobhan Stewart
2. David Campbell
3. Chris Erl
4. Mukhtar Galan
5. Alex Ramirez

Stewart had 1,985 votes in the first round, while Campbell had 1,719. Erl had 1,214, Galan had 929 and Ramirez had 704.

There were 512 total abstentions over the four rounds.

“I just want to say thank you so much to everyone that had a part in voting this year,” she said. “I will do everything in my power to make sure next year is an amazing year for students.”

For her plans tonight, she said she would “try to digest everything that happened. I don’t think I’m going to sleep.”

6,073 voters turned out for the election, the largest total all-time for the MSU and the largest percentage (33.4%) since 1998.

Voting period over: candidates await results from 33.4% voter turnout

By tonight, the MSU will have a new president-elect.

The waiting is almost over – votes are in, and the electronic ballots won’t take long to count. Before results are released, the candidates must participate in a meeting to discuss fines for campaign violations.

Though it’s not yet known which way the votes went, the number of voters has been released. Out of 20,045 eligible voters, 6,703 McMaster students ranked the candidates for a voter turnout of 33.4 per cent.

The turnout is unusually high. Last year, 23.7 per cent of the undergrad population voted, according to the Elections department. The year before, it was 22.2 per cent. The numbers might be a reflection of the field; it’s not every year that the election has five serious contenders with such radically different viewpoints. It might have also helped that students received an email in their MUSS accounts that directed them to the online ballot.

Keep an eye on the Sil’s MSU Presidentials 2012 blog for news of the results.

Humanities society pres bashes Erl

The online polls had just opened. Lisa Bifano, president of the Humanities Society and member of the SRA Humanities caucus, posted a 1400-word note to Facebook with her personal “analysis” of each MSU presidential candidate, offering an “inside scoop” on the race.

She ranked her choices, dedicating a paragraph to each hopeful, balancing pros and cons. The top spot went to David Campbell, with Siobhan Stewart coming second, and Alex Ramirez and Mukhtar Galan tied for third.

And when she got to fifth-ranked Chris Erl, with whom she works on the Humanities Society executive and SRA Humanities caucus, she didn’t hold anything back.

She wrote that he was “difficult to work with,” had “hidden agendas” and that she “felt manipulated and cheated” during his campaign. Some of the work he had done, she said, was “merely a step towards reaching his goal of being the next MSU Dictator.. opps [sic] I mean President.”

“It’s disappointing to see somebody in a professional capacity, like the president of the Humanities Society, somebody that I work closely with, say those kinds of things,” said Erl about the Feb. 1 note.

“I’ve had disagreements with her in the past – there are always disagreements in faculty societies, there are disagreements in the Assembly – but it’s disheartening to see somebody say those things during a presidential campaign this late into the campaign,” he said.

In her note, Bifano was careful to say that she was not part of any campaign team, and urged voters to make their own informed decisions about the candidates.

“I think students look to those who have been involved and who have worked with all the candidates for their thoughts and opinions,” said Bifano about the post. “I made sure that I remained very unbiased. By no means am I saying who to vote for; more so, these are my thoughts, here are my experiences, do with it what you will, and I made sure I said that throughout.”

“Everybody knows it’s an extremely close race,” said Erl. “I think what she said was an attempt to try to sway the individuals that she knows, individuals that hold her opinion in high regard, to put me last on the ballot so I have less of a chance of winning.”

Regardless of the election’s outcome, Erl and Bifano will be serving out their terms on both the Humanities Society and SRA until the end of the term. According to Erl, this incident will “ruin our working relationship for the next little while.”

 

This article appeared in the Feb. 1 print edition of the Sil.

All-candidates debate kicks off voting period

The MSU Presidential Debate is always one of the most important events of election time, where the candidates are set in front of the student centre atrium’s fireplace for a public discussion of the election issues.

You could see the stress of the campaign taking its toll on some of the candidates, as this was one of their greatest opportunities to reach as many students en masse.

Each candidate was given three minutes to speak at the beginning of the event, followed by a question and answer session, during which students present were encouraged to write down and submit questions to be asked and publicly answered by the candidates. Opening statements were all well-rehearsed, as the candidates have been publicly speaking of their platforms to countless classrooms full of students for a little over a week.

The first question asked was, “please comment on the University’s long-term plan and how the MSU fits into it.” Each candidate had a similar answer, either placing the MSU “right in the middle” as candidate Mukhtar Galan stated, or as Alex Ramirez said, “at the forefront.” Some difficulties mentioned were the high turnover rate that the MSU sees each year in student employees, as Siobhan Stewart pointed out, and the talk of a second campus, as mentioned by David Campbell.

At one point, each candidate was asked which of their opponents would be their second choice on their own ballots. Ramirez chose Chris Erl, Stewart chose Campbell, Campbell chose Stewart, Galan chose Erl, and Erl chose all four (which would lead to a spoiled ballot, noted moderator Jeff Wyngaarden).

The remainder of the debate was filled with questions pertaining to candidates’ favourite platform points of their own or of another candidate, and a critique of one main point of each candidates’ platforms.

Some of the hot topics of the debate were the current financial stability of the MSU and ability at this point to expand services, concerns of McMaster expanding off-campus, HSR bus services to students and green initiatives.

The voting period opened today at 9  a.m. and will close tomorrow at 5 p.m. Students are encouraged to check their McMaster email accounts for more information.

– DF

Before they were candidates: Video edition

By now, everyone who’s remotely interested in the 2012 MSU Presidential election has probably seen some of the candidate videos. But before Siobhan Stewart was putting up Adele covers, before David Campbell was featuring Tony Buzzin and before Mukhtar Galan was showing he had a good feeling, some of the candidates were already starring in some homemade YouTube gold.

—

In 2008, just prior to his first year at Mac, Chris Erl filmed a video for his entry into the CBC’s “Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister” competition. Though his bid was ultimately unsuccessful, the younger Erl showed that he was a budding politician.

 

During the 2010 presidentials, David Campbell had a role in the campaign video for friend and fellow Arts & Science student Mary Koziol, who went on to serve as President in 2010/2011. Campbell’s election strategies resemble those of Koziol, and his campaign team includes Asfand Minhas, Joe Finkle and others who are close with the former students union CEO.

 

Alex Ramirez was the lone candidate in this election without a campaign video until Monday’s Public Service Announcement. But that didn’t mean he couldn’t be found on Youtube. After losing the SRA October by-election in 2009, Ramirez won a seat on the Assembly in the following spring after filming this video with fellow SRA hopeful Hadi Behdad.

 

– BD & SC

Campbell video attacked in Youtube comments

A few Youtube users had some strong comments about David Campbell’s campaign music video, released on Jan. 25.

One comment, by user comrademariategui, said that the video was “full of racial stereotypes,” and that it was “disgusting that someone who might be President” posted it.

From her account quixoticnarcotic, Sarah Ali, who was on the SRA Social Sciences caucus until just recently, made more detailed statements. “The implicit othering and troubling comfort with a primarily homogenized cast, interspersed with typecast roles is both frightening and inappropriate in a campaign video. Just lost my vote,” she wrote.

In a second comment, she discussed Campbell’s “offensive type-casting of the few non-white members of this video. The conformity with the idea that a song is ‘fashionable’ with a man of colour rapping, whilst a white male cheers him on from the sidelines both takes away his agency, and creates a set of binary oppositions where David Campbell, the clean-cut white male is implicitly superior to his racialized sidekick.”

Ali was referring to the appearance of Anthony Bishop, also known as Tony Buzzin, in the video. Bishop is a former member of the McMaster men’s basketball team and an aspiring rapper.

The negative feedback was hidden for having “received too many negative votes,” according to Youtube. The Campbell campaign has since disabled commenting on the video, effectively removing all previous comments.

Campbell explained that he thought the comments were “radically unfair.” He added, “the comments really were, I felt, much more of a personal attack than anything to do with platform points or the MSU or student issues.”

His team is considering switching commenting from blocked to moderated, he said, with the hope of keeping it “restricted to dialogue about issues rather than personal stuff.”

Ali, who has been a strong and open supporter of Chris Erl in the election, was disciplined by the SRA earlier this month after posting a comment on Facebook about another member of the Assembly during a meeting. Because of her program change out of Social Sciences, she recently had to resign her seat.

Both inside and outside the SRA, though, Ali has demonstrated a passion for social justice issues, particularly ones related to race discrimination.

Ali was not available for comment.

– SC

Evaluating platforms: the good and the bad

Even the best of candidates is prone to the good, the bad and sometimes the ugly. The MSU elections are no different. With the five candidates offering unique and comprehensive platforms, there is bound to be some point of contention among each.

Chris Erl

The Good: There is no doubt about it, food is expensive. Even a simple salad costs as if it were made from money itself. As it stands, Erl plans to “fight for more affordable, better quality food on campus”, in addition to “working to have our clubs exempted from Paradise Catering’s monopoly.” While the latter might be more feasible than the former, both would be beneficial. Aside from having a limited selection, clubs have struggled to pay the exorbitant prices of Paradise Catering. “A group had to pay 75 dollars just for coffee,” said Erl. By allowing the variety of clubs another means to access food, the MSU would be ensuring an improved chance for the numerous smaller clubs to succeed.

The Bad: The HSR B-line is not bad in and of itself. It goes without saying that everyone loves buses. But before one supports a campaign centralized on getting “better buses on campus,” one has to realize that the B-line was removed from campus four years ago for a reason; in order to ensure more rapid service, the B-line shifted its service to Main Street as opposed to in front of Divinity College and McMaster University Health Centre (which are only a short walk away from Main). This fails to mention that the decision to remove the B-line from the campus was driven by the McMaster administration in order to ensure safety by helping to “keep the campus pedestrian-friendly” and “to comply with the university’s campus vision.” If the B-line was to be brought back, the MSU would be trailing on a worn path of the past – one it has already changed for an arguably more beneficial future.

David Campbell

The Good: Sustainability takes a central role in Campbell’s campaign, specifically a determination to institute campus composting that’s accessible to students. After discussing the issue with Kate Whalen, the Manager of Sustainability at McMaster, Campbell stressed that, “this has been a great concern for students, but there has never been a concerted voice to get it done.” If the resources were collected, and the project was subsequently implemented, the effect would immediately be noticed. Areas such Centro will no longer be a factory of waste and garbage, but instead, a centre of composting that promotes a sustainable future.

The Bad: Besides the overwhelming eyesore that a clashing colour combination of black, yellow and maroon may cause, an attempt to bring the Hamilton Tiger-Cats to Hamilton may be more of a detrimental to McMaster than its benefits suggest. Forgetting obvious potential problems regarding funding, attempting to house the Ticats on campus, regardless of when the games are hosted, will be exacerbate already poor parking and sustainability issues. It would be a logistical nightmare attempting to house the minimum amount of fans needed to maintain a CFL franchise (approximately 26,000). Although Campbell admits that “the games would have to be in the summer, and all of the funding would have to be from the Ticats not to burden the students,” attempting to bring a large amount of fans in a short amount of time may be impossible in such an isolated stadium such as Ron Joyce.

Mukhtar Galan

The Good: “Where’s the WiFi?” Although these four words are deceptively simple, they have captured a major technological problem of the University: there isn’t wireless Internet across the campus. Areas such as BSB, residences, or the Arts Quad are Internet black holes. And Galan, a fifth-year Civil Engineering student, is perhaps strung from the creative best to discuss the technological state of McMaster University with the administration. In an attempt to “bring back relevancy to the MSU and its services,” Galan is offering a grassroots solution. By starting with a very specific mandate, one which affects almost all students, he’s speaking to students on a relatable level.

The Bad: Unlike the many other candidates, Galan’s experience with governance in the MSU is limited. He himself admits that “my involvement in the MSU has been short in comparison others.” In particular, he has only served on the SRA for a short time, while all others have had a significantly longer tenure at some point during their university careers. Some have consequently criticized his platform for addressing concerns that are not within the scope of the MSU. Whether this is true or not, Galan maintains that he has relevant experience outside the Union – a comment which may be supported by his broad array of both student society and community experience.

Siobhan Stewart

The Good: As the administration clambers over itself in attempts to find adequate study space for a large student populous, Stewart is offering what she calls a “feasible and practical” solution: using Bridges as a study space. Continuing in the spirit of the current MSU, the plan is to keep the Bridges dining area open longer during exams. This would consequently help to house the large student population by offering a unique and different work environment during a stressful time.

The Bad: Fall midterms can be a source of anxiety, and sometimes depression. What if a break was offered in the middle of the fall term? Stewart is suggesting just that. “A mental break, not a vacation,” she says. While any struggling student would let out a sigh of relief at the very notion of a fall break, logistical challenges come to mind – most of which Stewart herself has admitted to. For faculties such as Engineering, which requires a minimum number of weeks that must be included in the program, a fall break would be difficult, if not impossible, to implement. Because of such faculties, McMaster would have to cut into its other various breaks, such as the exam break or Welcome Week. But Stewart states that “it’s easy to highlight the challenge, but it is even more challenging to come up with creative solutions. And that’s what the MSU president is supposed to do.”

Alex Ramirez

The Good: Characterizing himself as a person who “fearlessly speaks his mind in class,” Alex Ramirez could be called a champion of social justice. Much of his platform seems to centralize on societal inequities. An interesting translation of his passion into student life (many others are more externally focused) are the LGBTQ social nights. As with much of the LGBTQ momentum this year, such a platform point is meant to demonstrate that equality is a concern of the student union.

The Bad: Even though Ramirez’s campaign is well intended, vagueness may be its downfall. Cluttered with overarching statements like, “the SRA and MSU reinforce a top-down structure that perpetuates a culture of elitism” and “cooperation is the ethos of the cultural transformation,” the platform as a whole seems to lack specificity. While it can and has been argued by various members in the campaign that this is not the case, the vagueness in the platform points becomes more evident by the analyzing the platform as a whole. Using headings of transformation, community, communication and cooperation to form the pillars of the campaign, there is a disconnect between the ultimate goal of social justice and how to achieve it through these four broad headings. For example, under the transformation heading, it is stated that the MSU will launch a department on poverty reduction in Hamilton. Good as that may be for the community, the goal is neither specific nor completely connected with the MSU and its clubs that already work on poverty reduction.

– KN

Who’s your candidate?

In this week’s print edition of the Sil, which is the only one during the campaign period prior to voting days, get to know who your candidates are (News, A5) and what they stand for (Opinions, A7).

View the online, interactive version of the issue

Visit our website

Voters get first look at candidates

Most people watching the ‘informal’ debate at TwelvEighty Tuesday night were decided voters – members of campaign teams, friends of the candidates, people currently involved in the MSU’s administration. They did their best to show support for their favourites and suppress any surprise admiration for the others.

Chris Erl addresses the crowd at Tuesday night's informal debate at TwelvEighty

But those few who were on the fence got a good sense for the candidates. The five presidential hopefuls sat on stools against the bar’s brick wall at the back left, answering questions posed by moderator and MSU Speaker Jeff Wyngaarden, who chairs SRA meetings. The laid-back event didn’t involve debate, as the candidates, some with a beer in hand, simply took turns responding.

David Campbell was one of the more relaxed public speakers. His warm humour peaked when he named the late crocodile hunter Steve Irwin as his chief role model – one that had not changed since the eighth grade, he said. Though he was confident and reasonable, his platform points came off a little tentative, particularly when he refrained from describing his personal vision for the MSU, saying it was “different for everyone.”

Out of the bunch, Chris Erl was probably the most effective in getting his platform across. He spoke well, and some of those in the crowd responded positively to his strong, labour union leader-like tone. His exaggerated facial expressions, however, were a little much, especially while opponent Alex Ramirez was speaking – it should be noted that, prior to the elections when Ramirez was preparing a last-minute candidacy, campaign teams were somewhat fluid between the Erl and Ramirez camps.

To Mukhtar Galan goes the likeability award. He was fun, genuine and relatable. Though his answers sometimes demonstrated his lack of experience in student politics compared to his opponents, his platform points stuck to simple and relevant issues.

Remaining consistent in his assertion that he is the most outspoken and political candidate in the race was Alex Ramirez. He spent too much time, though, defending both his platform and his character, responding to whatever critiques (overheard or assumed) have found their way to him in the two-day-old campaign period. He explained that his community-focused attitude was, actually, suitable to the MSU president, and that, despite his seriousness on the issues, he was really a fun guy to be around.

Siobhan Stewart seemed the least comfortable standing in front of the group at TwelvEighty, though she was able to highlight a few of her major promises, including a peer support line for students. When asked what points they liked in one another’s platforms, Siobhan’s ideas drew strong support.

The questions were simple, open-ended and relatively typical talking points, so no candidate encountered too many challenges in their first organized public introduction to the student body. After the one-hour question-and-answer period, all five got a chance to schmooze with those who stuck around at the bar.

Next Tuesday, Jan. 31 at 12 p.m., a more formal debate will be held in the student centre atrium.

-SC

Day Two

Optimism seems to be surrounding the candidates of the 2012 MSU Presidential election.

Campaigning is well into its second day, and already the numerous questions, classroom talks and other campaign appearances are testing the sanity of this year’s president hopefuls. That may have a lot to do, however, with a burst of interest in the elections from students.

“Unlike other elections where the candidacy is mostly insular, I feel that people have been delving into the elections process in general,” said Joe Finkle, campaign manager for David Campbell.

The candidates seem to agree. Campaign teams for Mukhtar Galan and Siobhan Stewart both admitted that they were impressed by the students’ interest into their candidate’s campaign.

“The students have been very receptive to the campaign, and more importantly, to the election process as a whole,” said Chris Erl.

With five candidates whose jubilance matches that of their campaign colours and whose experience has prepared them to market to a diverse group of students, one would be hard-pressed to find a student who has not yet heard about the election in one way or another. The McMaster Campus has been plastered with posters, videos are being shot of most of the candidates, and all of the websites have been fully launched.

In response to the overwhelming amount of campaigning, many students have enquired into the elections race. Skepticism about the MSU President’s ability to make a difference is always a part of the campaign period, but some students have lauded the breadth of each of the platforms.

“It seems every candidate is discussing different issues pertinent to a wide variety of students,” said Jessica Teicher, a second-year Arts and Science student.

Alex Ramirez said however, that, “This is only just the beginning. We haven’t even played our best cards yet. There is still a lot to see, and a lot to do.”

As the week rolls on, and the candidacy race intensifies, the election hype will only continue as the “best cards” are saved for last.

Tonight, some of those cards may come out at the Presidential Pub Night hosted in TwelvEighty starting at 6:00pm.

– KN

Candidate videos

Everyone likes campaign videos.

Chris Erl, Siobhan Stewart and Mukhtar Galan have launched campaign clips, and David Campbell is shooting one today.

So far, there’s some pretty impressive stuff. Candidates are realizing how crucial a multimedia platform is and it looks like they’ve put some pretty significant resources into this.

A member of Alex Ramirez’s campaign team told me they’re not doing videos, since all the other campaigns have them and they want to take a ‘different approach.’ They did say clips might be released during the campaign.

Here are the videos that have already been released, along with some thoughts and critiques about what they do. This page will be updated as more videos are released.

Siobhan Stewart:

Chalk up a victory in the ‘catchy campaign meme’ category for Stewart, whose video features ‘Something For You,’ a cover of Adele’s ‘Someone Like You,’ fitting Stewart’s campaign slogan. It’s not only clever, it fills in the musical campaign void left by 2010 candidate Casey Park two years ago. Here are the words:

“Come by we’ll find something for you
After all this is your MSU too
This is our home, my friend
Just remember my pledge
Something for you and everyone coming ahead
Welcome to your MSU, let the message spread”

Apart from the catchy song, there isn’t a whole lot of platform material in here. Instead, some general statements from Stewart about how she’s had good conversations with students and that a good MSU president should listen to students. If I’m a voter, sure, this makes the campaign memorable, but as far as educating me about what Siobhan’s all about, I’m left wanting more.

Chris Erl:

This is pretty platform specific – the video deals with Erl’s campaign target of ‘better buses.’ He emphasizes his experience with the HSR as a Hamiltonian, and that he’s already made transit a personal advocacy priority by talking about his ‘We Need LRT’ campaign he’s spearheaded with the MSU.

Now, cue the violins – no, really, as Erl talks, the background music is violins. Erl says he’ll fight to bring back the B-Line through campus, provide a 12-month HSR pass option and fight for free parking for students during exams.

Those are some pretty hefty promises, no doubt, especially given that students don’t vote in large numbers municipally and are already short on leverage. We’ll be hearing from Mr. Erl throughout the campaign on how to get around this.

Mukhtar Galan:

Mukhtar Galan has a good feeling about this election. And apparently, so do the rest of the students at the university. Galan’s video features the sights, and occasionally sounds, of students enjoying football games, Welcome Week concerts, Student Centre events, classes and good ol’ hangouts. Talking to Galan, he’s a pretty optimistic dude who wants to bring that same attitude and outlook to the MSU.

The one kind of person who wouldn’t have a good feeling? Anyone who’s looking to glean some insight about MG2012’s campaign from this video. While it makes me feel like McMaster has a pretty boss campus, I’m not really sure what the message is, let alone what it does to inspire me to vote for Galan.

– BD

Campaiging underway

Mukhtar Galan discuss the campaign in the student centre

If you haven’t noticed the hundreds of campaign posters up across campus, campaigning for the 2012 MSU presidential election began today at 8 a.m.

The Silhouette has all the info you’ll need on the candidates, their platforms, their sites and where they’ll be during the next week and a half for the campaign.

We’ve compiled a list of the candidates and all their key info here.

More information as it comes.

Five candidates preparing for campaign

Nominations are in. David Campbell, Chris Erl, Mukhtar Galan, Alex Ramirez and Siobhan Stewart will compete for MSU presidency starting on Monday at 8 a.m. Until then, none of the five are permitted to carry out campaigning of any sort. Voting will take place on Feb. 1 and 2, and the winner will be announced Feb. 3 at Charity Ball.

The major events for the candidates over the next two weeks are as follows:
Presidential Pub Night at TwelvEighty – Jan. 24 at 6 p.m.
Presidential Debate – Jan. 31 at 12 p.m. in the MUSC atrium
Brief half-time address at the McMaster men’s basketball game – Feb. 1 at 8 p.m. in Burridge Gym

Deadline for submissions closing in

At 5 p.m. today, which is when nominations are due to the elections department of the MSU, the field of presidential candidates for 2012/2013 will be set. An all-candidates meeting with the elections department will follow, where candidates will hear the rules and hear from current MSU President Matt Dillon-Leitch.

No campaigning will be allowed until Monday at 8 a.m., when posters will hit the walls, websites will go up and materials will be given out.

What are you hoping to see from your candidates?