Winter 2007 ASUCD Election/Talk

This page is for discussing the contents of Winter 2007 ASUCD Election.

Regarding Erica Rozetti— It was not an Aggie misprint, she said to Richard Proctor that she was running as LEAD, and so that is what Proctor reported. If anything, it was Rozetti's mistake for saying she was running with LEAD, but by no means the Aggies. I had the conversation with Proctor the morning the article came out (I read it online), and because he was the one to write the Names of the Dead piece. —MaxMikalonis

—
I'm not convinced that it was a mistake, considering the amount of LEAD promotion she's been doing. —JosephBleckman

• What do you mean? We have six candidates for six spots. That is a fact. Kinda of black and white. I really don't think there is any massive conspiricy theory. Independants and smaller slates support Exec tickets all the time. Rob and FUCK supported the LEAD exec, but that didn't make them LEAD candidates. I don't want to do a revert war...but the facts are facts, and I figure that is what we should stick to. Andrew
  

• I'd like to be able to trust that, but in this case considering her campaign so far, I don't think I can. —JosephBleckman

sorry, I was writing that when you made the talk page, Joseph says he doesn't trust me. All I can say is that LEAD is only running six candidates (there are only six spots, makes sense to me) and if you consider that I am a active member of the organization, and Joseph is of the rival slate, i might now what is going on. Anyway, I won't edit the page, i figure someone outside of all this should make the decision based on the facts, have a good night. Andrew

• I have mainly been basing what I've been editing based upon what's been in the Aggie/facebook. If you could provide us with a list of the members of the LEAD organization that could help us decide what to say about her status. —JosephBleckman
  

• Since facebook is the end all info site for ya, look at the names in the LEAD facebook group and that will give you a good notion of who our dues-paying members are. - JamesSchwab
  

• You require dues? Like, of the non-Official Slate candidates too? I supose that adds another level to a potential definition of Slate affiliation, however, I feel that she would still qualify as being LEAD affiliated if a LEAD agent is behind her run. —JosephBleckman
  

• I'm not sure if she has renewed it but she was a card-carrying member for a while. James Schwab
  

• LEAD has "agents"? I guess I'll need to start watching my back when I'm on the 3rd floor ~Matt Shannon
  

• Agent = Someone in their organization structure. As you know, the ASUCD Political Parties are made up of more than just their official candidates. —JosephBleckman
  

• I do not have the latest numbers, since I am not longer campaign manager, of how many of our dues-paying members are active in ASUCD, but if you ask someone and they do pay the dues they have been trained to proudly say "I am a LEADer". -James Schwab
  

• I would like to add that although I am an insider to this whole debate, it's clear that Rozetti is LEAD, the whole idea of her candidacy is to increase the number of votes LEAD obtains and it is no different than Student Focus running 8 people. LEAD needs more votes, they are running the same number of candidates Student Focus is because they want to win. It's clear. GregWebb

Despite what everybody says, I want to say once and for all that George Ajlouny is not running on the LEAD slate. He's an independent now, not because he has LEAD tendencies, but because he feels that he can better represent his constituents as an independent than on Student Focus. —BrentLaabs

• George tends to lean more towards Student Focus, I think. Perhaps it would be proper to list him as being part of the Student Focus party in government, yet not the Student Focus organization, nor slate? Seems the most descriptive depiction of him. —JosephBleckman

• Non sequitur? Because that was soooo relevant —MaxMikalonis

Get over yourselves. There are the candidates that contribute money to their own elections, and they have supporters. Just because someone supports a candidate doesn't mean he or she is a member of that candidate's slate. That is a ridiculous assumption. For instance, I have voiced my support of a few StuFo candidates in the past, but I ran on L.E.A.D. in Winter of 2006. What does that make me? I never paid anything beyond my campaign finances, and I don't walk around saying I'm a member of an organization that has no written or recorded membership. I am glad that many of you have decided someone's affiliation based of assumptions and inferences rather than just confirming it with her. —Andrew Bianchi