As I am a freshman, this is my first time personally experiencing the already-prolonged holiday of Student Senate campaign season. It feels like a repeat of the 2012 presidential election campaigns with all the nagging and the advertising. Unlike the 2012 campaigns though, none of the tickets seem in any way fit for the offices they’re running for.
There have already been nasty words thrown around between the tickets, and some dirty campaigning measures have been taken. Just look at how some advocates for the One ticket wrote over some of what Restart chalked. As an outsider and someone who generally doesn’t care about Student Senate due to its irrelevancy, are these the so-called “leaders” we’re supposed to choose from on April 17?
The Action ticket is plagued with vagueness and indecisiveness. This is evident in its lofty and often already-attained goals (going off Zainab Kandeh and Rose Troyer’s interview from the March 25 edition of The Post), as well as its failure in advertising. It’s very clear these are Scripps kids, due to their over-reliance on social media and hashtags in hopes of making the ticket go viral, which is definitely not working. I’m convinced that this isn’t even an actual ticket but just two women running for whatever reason.
The One ticket couldn’t be any more of an insider ticket even if it tried, so much so that it shares many similarities with the winning ticket from last year, VOICE. You know, the ticket that gave Ohio University great student leaders such as Nick Southall. The two tickets share the same goals of changing how SAC runs, putting promotion over issues and highlighting experience with Student Senate over ideas. Given VOICE’s inability to lead this year and the fact that One presidential candidate Jordan Ballinger was a campaign manager for VOICE, I see no reason to believe that One will do anything but perpetuate the broken and irrelevant system that Student Senate currently uses.
Finally, there’s the Restart ticket, and I am debating whether it’s the least-worst ticket. Some parts of its agenda such as open voting membership are appealing, but it’s debatable whether it will let those parts fall to the wayside. The Ohio University Student Union has been mainly known for protesting the administration until they get exactly what they want. Because of this, it wouldn’t be impossible to believe that if they’re elected, they will create complete gridlock between Student Senate and OU’s administration and possibly the student body, making Student Senate even more irrelevant than it is now.
Like the 2012 general elections, the leadership positions up for grabs are represented by the many possible ways those positions can be led. However, there’s nothing compelling enough to make me go out and vote for any of these terrible tickets. The members of the student body are better off ignoring this year’s elections, if they can.
Austin Linfante is a freshman studying journalism.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline, "Whichever Student Senate ticket wins, OU loses"
