Shortly before 8 pm yesterday, an anonymous person or group hacked the USC Elections site. Voters were redirected to a page that welcomed them to the “Justin Bieber Hairstyle vote 2012” and informed them that “a vote for Bieber is a vote for world peace.” As of now, the motivations behind the defacement of the site are unknown. Still, the act raises an important question: was it just an example of wanton e-vandalism perpetrated by ne’er-do-wells or something more – something political? In the often superficial and super-sensational world of USC presidential elections, a vote for the Biebs’ luscious locks may not be so different than a vote for any of the candidates. Continue reading
Disclaimer: the views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of the mitZine or the MITSC.
When voters head to the (virtual) polls this week, they will be making a choice based ultimately on one of three criteria: platform, campaign, or character.
Many students will vote for a platform. They will peruse the candidates’ websites and identify promises that appeal to them. They may even take a more holistic approach and vote for what they deem the best overall vision for the USC.
Others will vote for a campaign. They have watched the videos, attended the debates, and followed social media. They have seen the candidates jockey to differentiate themselves and judged them on their public face.
The remaining students will vote based on the character of a candidate. They have taken the platforms and campaigns with a grain of salt, opting instead to focus on the qualities and experiences that distinguish each potential president.
Unlike some years, however, none of this year’s candidates have stood out in all three categories. None of them are unequivocally deserving of the position, and that makes things difficult for independent voters. To help make sense of your options, I offer here my endorsements for USC president based on the category you believe is most important. I welcome feedback in the comments below. Continue reading
In the thousands of years we’ve progressed as a species, we’ve finally agreed on how important it is to associate one’s self with an amiable colour scheme and develop one’s personal ‘brand.’ Excuse me while I die a little inside.
Regardless of how this writer feels about it, it’s nonetheless true that being familiar, consistent, and professional-looking are contemporary necessities for anyone trying to sell themselves (or their wares) in this our post-post-post-whatever Age of Sweeping Generalisations and ADD.
In other words: get a nice website. Continue reading
Stage presence spoke louder than words at yesterday’s presidential debate in Huron’s Great Hall. This was the debate we’d all been waiting for. As current USC members snickered amongst each other in the front row, campaign team members of all presidential stripes and a handful of interested voters sat forward in their seats. Spectators quickly transcended their roles as politically involved students to become politically motivated bloodhounds, delighting in the candidates’ every falter. Continue reading
The USC presidential campaign is starting to take shape after the candidates made their first debate appearance in front of a packed Mustang Lounge last night. For three hours, Adam Fearnall, Claire McArthur, Logan Ross and Jon Silver fielded questions about their platforms and personalities from USC insiders while #VOTEUSC tweets were projected live on the wall.
The Big Winner?
No one, really. But there wasn’t a big loser either. For the most part, all of the candidates played it safe, concerned more with finding their public speaking confidence than boldly defining their vision. All four remained calm and composed through a barrage of vague and repetitive questions that earned appropriately vague and repetitive answers. Continue reading