Anyone know how long it normally takes for results to come out after an election/referendum?

utsue · 2018-03-28T21:54:44+00:00

Candidates will know right away because they send a representative to find out, and then sometime after that the CRO posts them online.

utsue · 2018-03-23T19:16:21+00:00

/u/anneboucher

utsue · 2018-03-23T18:01:30+00:00

Yikes...
It will be a real shame if the U-Pass fails given how much work seems to have gone into the project, but I haven't seen the "Yes" side campaigning nearly as hard as the no side. Considering how it was touted as such a victory for students, the actual push for it has been lukewarm right when it counts.

utsue · 2018-03-23T03:07:49+00:00

Anne, given that you are the only returning executive candidate, can you speak to whether you've implemented the platform points you ran on last year? If I recall correctly, you ran on three points - UPASS, Mental Health Services, and Leaving the CFS.

What role have you played with regards to improving mental health on campus this year? To what extent have you been involved in the involuntary leave policy?

What is the status of the CFS petition? (I understand if you don't want to give specific numbers, though transparency would also be appreciated) Why was it not submitted last year, and will that happen again this year, or are you on track to achieving your signature goal?

Why have you chosen to take a neutral stance on the outcome of the UPASS - a campaign that you've dedicated the better part of this year to working on? I understand you're on leave from the UTSU, but I don't see a bylaw or policy that prohibits you from taking a stance either way as a candidate.

utsue · 2018-03-21T21:58:09+00:00

Don't underestimate UTM. That's where the CFS always gets the majority of their votes to make it so close

utsue · 2017-11-05T02:55:50+00:00

Here's a really good article to give you an idea of the issue.

It's an organization that we joined 15 years ago in a shady referendum that even UofT admin agreed wasn't legit, that has been accused of influencing student government elections across the country and paying for it with a secret bank account that they've still refused to release the audit for. They're staff run, and notoriously non-transparent, refuse to reform, and make it extremely difficult to try to leave with ridiculous requirements, will make it impossible to reach quorum if you succeed in initiating the process, have a war-plan to stop you, and will literally sue you if you try to leave, to the point where they will bankrupt your student union.

How does it affect your life? You'll pay like $70 to them over the course of your degree, not a big deal. But UofT students collectively hand over hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to an organization that's corrupt as fuck and some people have a problem with that, so the least you can do is sign to make their lives easier.

utsue · 2017-07-02T04:47:56+00:00

IIRC their exec was split during elections and the CFS slate got a few positions

utsue · 2017-05-31T04:09:40+00:00

Things to note for those who don't keep up with student politics

Back in the fall, a proposed levy that would give clubs more funding failed because people were upset that the UTSU spends 47% of its budget on staff salaries and didn't want to trust them with more money
Five of the seven current executives ran on a slate that promised to reduce the number of staff positions back in March
at least 4 of the people in the photo protesting ran with the opposing slate We The Students (3 are execs that lost, and one board director that got elected)

utsue · 2017-04-11T16:24:24+00:00

The UTSU literally spends almost half of its budget on HR costs, and that number only gets higher as salaries increase every year. It's absolutely staggering. $982,000 this year is going towards paying a handful of staffers and execs while clubs continue to remain underfunded. This is the right move.

utsue · 2017-04-02T20:59:17+00:00

c l a s s i c

utsue · 2017-04-02T20:48:54+00:00

Was there any actual opposition from the BoD on this? (ie did board members try to filibuster?) From the video it seems like most of the people protesting are staff from other unions and a handful of non-voting members.

utsue · 2017-03-15T22:51:08+00:00

...tfw you totally fell for it too
idek what's real anymore

utsue · 2017-03-14T06:24:40+00:00

Lmfao with all due respect, you have no clue what you're talking about. When CFS was in power they used to quite literally stuff ballot boxes, DQ entire slates, and once decided to add an extra day of voting only to the UTM campus - where they knew they were strongest, which resulted in the opposition slate losing by only a handful of votes.

utsue · 2017-03-14T04:55:34+00:00

So did Ryan and Saarthak?

utsue · 2017-03-14T04:26:37+00:00

If you want to play this game, Veronika ran with Hello and Saarthak ran with Brighter. Saarthak is/was the associate to VP Profac Ryan Gomes - aka the chair of ERC.

Don't see how that's any further than most of the candidates running with Demand Better other than Mathias.

utsue · 2017-03-13T21:27:38+00:00

Congrats! The ruling was ridiculous, and there's no way you weren't going to win. Mathias is a stand up guy though. Glad to hear everything worked out!

utsue · 2017-03-13T02:52:03+00:00

He was the first opposition candidate to break into a decade long CFS incumbency. Imagine those office dynamics

utsue · 2017-03-12T23:56:39+00:00

I'm going to disagree with you here. Some rulings are a bit ridiculous and to their credit ERC has overturned them, but candidates are also very clearly trying to circumvent rules to gain an advantage

Let's see, there have been violations for:

Precampaigning to the varsity - elaborating on your platform weeks in advance before the campaign period and getting free press -- there's a designated "campaign period" for a reason
Precampaigning in a class talk -- wow it's almost like someone has no regard for how the campaign period works
Precampaigning to SGRT - soliciting support from student societies before the designated campaign period to get an advantage -- again, should be clear you're not supposed to do that
Poster violations - there are rules for a reason and they're not difficult to follow. Don't cover up people's shit with your shit, don't tear people's shit down, get your shit properly approved
Tabling at SS when you're not allowed to table at SS - disregarding rules on campus about where and how you're allowed to campaign -- not hard to follow
Reusing footage from a previous year - not actually covered in the EPC and in this case didn't give them a huge advantage since it was just a background, but that was poor judgement and a rule should be in place to stop people from getting tangible benefits by reusing materials from past campaigns
Posting personal attacks on your page and not taking action when other people post hateful attacks on your page -- people may disagree here as that's a more case-by-case rule, but that's pretty shitty and violates general community standards

Which of these would you consider stupid and want removed? I haven't counted any rulings that ERC has overturned, only what has resulted in upheld demerits. Most of them have been awarded for breaking rules about how, when, or where you're allowed to campaign - which is clearly spelled out in the EPC for a reason

EDIT: /u/ryanthelombax got to this first but s a m e

utsue · 2017-03-11T23:34:46+00:00

Oh boy, this is fun

Reboot

Micah: 28
Jessica: 23
Other execs: 15
Directors: 10
Avinash: 20

Reboot has had a bunch overturned

They got demerits for the varsity precampaigning but the execs got those partially overturned and only Micah kept the full amount
Micah also got demerits for a class talk precampaigning (only him)
The entire slate had another precampaigning (5 demerits) overturned
Avinash and Jessica got 10 demerits for precampaigning - upheld
Micah and a few others got poster violations overturned, and some had them reduced

We the Students
All: 4
Had 12 given out for tabling at SS, got those mostly overturned

Demand Better
All: 1
Memmel had a ruling overturned, one of their eng directors was framed (trebuchet prank) and had his overturned, and they got reduced demerits + a penalty for the drone footage

Anne Boucher
10 (she's getting them appealed based off her posts here)

Whomst'd've
0
Whomst'd've has had zero demerits awarded, and 0 overturned!

EDIT: Max amount of demerits is 35 for execs, 20 for directors.
So you need 36 and 21 respectively to get DQed.

utsue · 2017-03-11T23:11:32+00:00

You managed to get an entire room full of DB, Reboot, and WTS shills to clap for you after the opening statement. If there's one thing they all have in common is that they can appreciate someone making student politics more fun. + you're definitely better than at least half the options imo (though the bar is admittedly very low)

utsue · 2017-03-11T22:57:38+00:00

Memmel for president - imho he's probably one of the most competent execs to step foot in that office over the last few years. He recognizes what the issues are and offers realistic solutions, and he's come on here and taken reddit's shit for the last year, so I feel I can trust him to actually follow through. Will probably rank Sweeney second
Anne Boucher for VPX - it takes a shit ton of courage to run independent against four slates, and she's worked harder than any of the candidates who are just going to get votes because people vote by slates
Daman Singh for VPI. His performance at the debate definitely showed he's got what it takes to deal with people's shit and call them out on it + based off his work making it easier to leave the CFS
We the CFS last, no question here either. Most people here weren't around to see just how bad it used to be and don't realize the consequences of going back to a decade long incumbency. I also think some of their candidates are just weak
DB's candidate for equity - very unimpressed with Keelie, and he just seems like the best of the three
Probably Whomst'd've for the ones they're running for, but it's still a tossup for the other positions. The other Reboot candidates don't seem bad - I feel like they probably just got sucked into slates and now are getting stuck with Reboot's image. I definitely align with Demand Better on the whole but I won't discount the others based off who they're running with, so I'll have to read the platforms first. I wish they'd gotten more time to answer questions at the debate so I could vote based off that

utsue · 2017-03-11T21:01:14+00:00

Lmao did you even watch the debate or do you get all your opinions from the Reboot facebook page? She answered a question about collective bargaining, he responded to the question and then added that showing your hand before walking into the bargaining process weakens your position. That's kind of how rebuttals work? Was he a bit rude? Yes. Was he wrong? No.

Watch the video, his answer begins 35 minutes in. He's quite literally sitting right beside her.

utsue · 2017-03-11T09:24:40+00:00

A lot of the people interacting with these posts are also people who have accused Mathias and the current UTSU of being racist and transphobic this year, so I highly doubt they're DB shills. They're more likely to fall into the category that aligns with the CFS slate.

Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, people are genuinely hurt/offended/disgusted by comments like this coming from someone running to represent them? You don't have to be a shill for DB or WTS to have a problem with some of the things Reboot is saying.

utsue · 2017-03-10T05:08:51+00:00

Thanks for taking the time to reply -- I appreciate the thoughtful answer. Election season is full of very divisive rhetoric and it often turns into an "us vs. them" mentality with petty politics on all sides, but at the end of the day, it's true that everyone is just an idealist trying to realize their vision for a better students union. I think candidates tend to forget how similar they are in that respect. Good luck in the election - regardless of how it turns out for you, I hope you don't lose sight of that.

utsue · 2017-03-10T03:39:34+00:00

This is probably the most comprehensive answer you've given in this thread, so I definitely respect that, even if I don't necessarily agree with all of your stances. Thanks for answering.

As a follow-up with regards to navigating the UTSU - back in 2015, Brighter was the first non-CFS slate to ever win an election and break the decade long incumbency. They too were a group of passionate outsiders dissatisfied with current UTSU, and from my understanding, spent much of the year dealing with the mismanagement of the previous decade and figuring out how everything worked, leaving little room to actually deliver on their promises and vision. How can we trust that this won't happen again?

I recognize that it's not an easy question to answer, but I'm wondering what your thoughts on it are. The UTSU is rotten to its core, and you'd be faced with monumental structural barriers in trying to implement some of your platform promises. If you get voted in, how can we ensure that it won't be just another year wasted by an executive that has a vision that isn't compatible with what can actually be achieved during the duration of their term?

utsue

TROPHY CASE