This should come as no surprise to anybody. I was anticipating a run off this election season. First off, would like to commend the remaining candidates for staying strong. Within 5 minutes after hearing the election results last Thursday, Dan Lazaro was already endorsing Jeremy Crystal. Guess that's how short it took for him to mourn his loss and rebound the defeat. This leads me to my next question: Did Dan know he was going to lose? If not, why didn't he think a little longer before running to make an endorsement. It just doesn't make that much sense to me, personally.
I commend Pravin Patel and The Hurricane for publishing an article today highlighting the flaws in several of Jeremy Crystal's central platforms. I said it before, and I'll say it again, OUR ADMINISTRATION HAS ALWAYS MAINTAINED AN OPEN DOOR POLICY. I don't know where Crystal's campaign got the idea that we didn't. I know I surely spent time meeting with him one night as he walked right into my office. Why? Because we have an open-door policy. I guess it's easier to judge the current administration when you aren't in Student Government. This does not necessarily mean you are not qualified, as neither Molly, Justin nor myself had any SG experience coming into office. But at the same time, you NEVER saw any of us "bashing" Annette Ponnock's administration - rather, we seeked out all of the good things she did and made sure to comment on those. Positivity speaks a hell of a lot more powerfully than negativity. Trust me.
In my last blog, I stated that Molly, Justin, and myself had chosen not to endorse any candidates. Things have changed a bit. After watching, hearing, and reading some of the campaign tactics of certain candidates, I'm no longer as open-minded and 'neutral' as I was previously. Molly is endorsing Brandon's campaign, of which I support her 100%. I have chosen to not publicly endorse any candidate, although will continue to share my disgust with some of the platforms the candidates are running on.
Best of luck.
DC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I agree with your thoughts and second the notion of how poor taste certain candidates have towards their fellow running mates. I have also said this before (in an interview with a Miami Hurricane representative, the article and thus my opinion never got published, I wonder why... but I digress), it is of very poor taste to bring forth the weaknesses of your opponents or of the past administration for that matter. In my opinion, those who lack the strengths that would allow them to dwell on those as opposed to the negative attributes of others like to criticize wrongs and forget about offering solutions, maybe because they have none, I don't know. In either case, I view direct attacks as an act of poor taste and look down upon it.
Awesome blog Danny, I agree with you.
Without a "party" system in SG, what does an endorsement really mean? The majority of people vote for who they know in a SG campaign.
One candidate's endorsement of another doesn't necessarily mean that those who voted for him will follow his endorsement.
Hopefully the campaign with the most integrity and realistic platform will come through victorious.
You've taken this whole campaign so personally, Danny, it's remarkable to me.
This is politics -- even if it is just campus politics, it's still politics. So when you have a candidate that is trying to be elected, oftentimes you're going to have that candidate compare himself and his policies to that of former administrations, in addition to comparing himself to his competitors. It's logical, it's reasonable, it makes sense. Stop dissing the guy for it.
Crystal talks about an open door policy when running -- I think that's a great thing. While you may have tried to make yourself as easy to reach as possible, Danny, Crystal is using this open door policy as a sort of platform in and of itself. In other words, he's making it known BEFORE he's elected that he'll be approachable. That's smart. He's publicizing his approachability. What's so wrong with that, and why must you frame it in such a way that it's insulting to you? He's trying to improve the communication between SG and the student body -- so let's disparage him for it and it take it personally!!!! Relax. Give me a break. He's trying to improve. If he's said you didn't have an open door policy in the past, it's because he wasn't aware that you did -- I don't know of anyone that WAS aware of your open door policy. It wasn't advertised, it wasn't made aware to the student body as a whole. Crystal is trying to do that through his campaign. For God's sakes, relax, and stop taking things so damned personally.
You've done a lot for SG, and I know it's difficult to hear your administration called out as one that has lost its connection with the student body. But no one is perfect, and regardless of how hard you've tried, it's hard to argue with the idea that communication COULD and SHOULD improve. So why then is Crystal lambasted for stressing the importance of that?
Gross has led a very "clean" campaign publicly while doing all sorts of shady things I don't care to discuss in this forum behind the scenes. Gross and his campaign have torn Crystal to shreds privately, attacking his character and his experience LONG BEFORE Crystal's campaign said anything about Gross, his platforms, or his character. The fact that you don't know that perhaps suggests more about your disconnect from the realities of this campus than anything.
Finally, way to commend The Hurricane! Weren't you the guy who wrote the Editorial punishing The Hurricane for its slanted portrayal of Student Government? And when ANOTHER slanted article surfaces, you praise it? Agenda, much?
That article was one of the most misleading pieces of journalism I've read in ages. While the article didn't flat out lie at any point in time, it did paint a very inaccurate portrait of the candidates' platforms.
The article highlights Crystal's ideas to increase commuter parking by paving and delineating the gravel parking lot by the business school, to allow unused dining hall meals to rollover or convert to dining dollars, to make Cane Card usable off campus, and to have an ATM at every residential college. These are lofty goals, yes, but if you've ever heard Jeremy speak, he's had discussions and done research that suggests these things can be done. Instead of asking for Crystal's research, it interviews skeptical and sketchy administrators.
Then the article focuses on Gross' goals to have an on-campus car rental system, to revamp the advising process and allow online registration for all students, and to expand Green U. What a joke! The car rental system is a lofty goal, agreed, and Whitely's openness to such a liability is confounding after having her talk about how "unlikely" extra ATMs are. And then the advising system and Green U?!?! Give me a break -- Crystal's got those platforms on his campaign, as well. You'll have to excuse him for shooting for the moon -- I suppose he should stick mostly to initiatives already being carried out by the University.
People laughed at you when you suggested the idea of getting iTunes U here and podcasts of lectures -- but here we are, on our way to making that happen.
Shame on you, of all people, for insulting someone for setting high goals and having lofty aspirations.
If you continue to take politics so personally, Danny, and try to make everything about YOU, you're not going to go very far.
PS: If you're going to endorse a candidate, then just do it. Stop beating around the bush and putting up painfully unsubtle and borderline classless Facebook statuses. Certainly you're above that.
Hey "anonymous" you really need to get a reality check here. Danny didn't praise the shitty Hurricane newspaper...he praised the WRITER OF THE EDITORIAL. The Hurricane is still a miserable joke that does not remotely resemble journalism.
Regarding your praising of Crystal's platforms and blasting of Gross'...you do realize that much research has been done by those in the administration and parts of student government regarding his platforms, and I found the editorial not to be misleading at all.
Pat Whitely has earned a great deal of respect during her time at this school and her quotes about Jeremy's rehashed and unrealistic "goals" are on target and to the point. Jeremy's goal of paving gravel lots is EXTREMELY inefficient (actually takes spots away), expensive (to the amount of multiple thousands of $$ per spot) and entirely unrealistic...there is NO way that they will be paved.
At most, perhaps "spots" will have painted lines (which was tried in the past year and a half with little success).
It won't matter anyway, especially with the expansion of the serpentine lot and probable conversion of the Hecht/Stanford/Wellness lot to commuter parking now that on-campus freshmen will no longer be able to buy parking passes (and thus, no vehicle).
A guy like Jeremy might speak well and might be competent enough to hold the office, but you have to understand that bashing SG and a candidate about their well-researched, feasible ideas does not reflect too positively on the opponent who can only talk and cannot prove how his "big" ideas are even possible.
"Positivity speaks a hell of a lot more powerfully than negativity."
Then why are you so stuck on bashing Crystal?
I agree with anonymous 100%. I have never cared as much for student government as I do this year as I see the portrayal of a classless, "slimy" and sneaky group in Gross's campaign. I understand their desperation in trying to overcome the obvious: Crystal is the charismatic candidate, he is the one who CARES for the student body, rather than cares what will go on his resume after his time here. Talk to Jeremy Crystal and then talk to Brandon Gross. Sincerity and a genuine desire to be ALL ABOUT U is what you will experience with the former, while the revelation of a true politician who will tell you what he knows you WANT to hear is what you will experience with the latter. Yes, ALL ABOUT U has both the endorsement of the Miami Hurricane and Dan Lazaro, which is also evident that Crystals' goals are researched and plausible, as well as well supported by a fellow student, Lazaro, who also wants the best for the STUDENTS. I hope those who read this make the right choice about what they want to see next year. We all agree that while Danny is undoubtedly a very hardworking, well-rounded person, we need a CHANGE in our STUDENT administration. If you wish to remain lost and disconnected between the administration and the student body, please vote for Brandon. It will be a much more relaxing and unproductive year.
to the previous comment...the entire structure of student government at this school needs to be overhauled in order to fulfill the goal of changing the way of communication/disconnect between sg and the rest of students.
sg will never resonate as 'the' in thing at any college campus, but it could, in general, serve to get more involved.
the current structure (especially with the student senate) might have been useful and effective some decades ago, but now not so much.
crystal can talk about changing the way sg and students communicate, but it's not going to happen, especially in one year. what's his plan to have better communication? how is he going to change the structure? i'd like to get an idea, as i'm sure every potential voter who cares would like to know as well before they vote.
Post a Comment