Twenty percent. That’s the amount of the entire student body that turned out to vote in the Associated Students, Inc. election on May 6 and 7. That is down 7.5 percent from last year’s election, according to current ASI president Angela Kramer. Why so low?
Given that students did not even have to ‘turn out’ anywhere to fill out their ballot, being able to vote online in the comfort of their own dorm, sitting in the dark in their skivvies if desired, was it too much to ask? Do students feel the election will not make a difference in the course of their college career? Or were we all too damn busy? I am asking these questions as a student who also did not vote. And I have my reasons. I am curious, though, to learn the main reason others chose not to.
It is kind of sad because the ASI president does play a really important role in matters that affect every student on campus. The president is involved in representing students’ viewpoints in every sector of campus life: from athletics, to the deans, to service at the health center and campus market to any other crazy incidents that happen on campus throughout the year. They are responsible for being accessible to students and addressing their concerns directly to the administration. And I can tell you from watching Kramer, the job is no walk in the park — it’s full-time.
It also seems like such a waste when not only presidential candidates, but also Board of Directors candidates, and all the campaign staff work hard lining the campus with ads and flyers that seem like they really took a long time and money to develop and print.
So what are some reasons? Anybody care enough to comment?
Based on their features in the Daily they all sounded like the same person, no one differentiated themselves when they had the chance. Wanting to be a voice for students should be assumed, as is a platform of sustainability and supporting on time graduation. Last year, Kramer had goals and a message, this year I don’t think anyone did that.
I still voted but I was uninterested in the results.
I tried to vote, but the website crashed of the company who ASI contracted to do the vote counting. I sure hope ASI doesn’t use them again.
I voted this year, but I believe that the reason why the voter turnout was so low is because the candidates were uncompelling this year (they offered the same platform, and none of the candidates described how they were going to implement their promises), and also because it is hard to find information about the platforms of the college board of directors candidates.
Instead of criticizing the three candidates out of the approximately 18,000 plus student body, who stepped up and invested in the future of the college by spending their own money (over $1000.00 each, time (countless hours per day) and energy for seemingly having the same platform, maybe everyone should commend these three candidates for listening and doing research as to what the students wanted and included it in their platforms. Put up or shut up as the saying goes, they did! 80% of the student body did not.
The voter turnout would have been higher had Mustang Daily’s article titled "Mustang Daily endorses nobody this year" bashed the candidates. If anyone read between the lines just a little bit, this article state that no candidate was qualified for the position as ASI President, and discouraged voting. I’m not saying that the Mustang Daily shouldn’t have not nominated a candidate, but it didn’t need to publish an article with negative wording.
If you want turnout, you have to give people a reason to vote–and I certainly didn’t have one this year. Nonetheless, because I am unlike 80% of this campus, I voted because it is my responsibility. At least if it turns out that Kelly Griggs fails as President (which I doubt), I have room to complain.
Yes, I agree that none of the candidates twinkled, but I disagree with the Mustang Daily’s article wording.
Perhaps the author of this blog post would like to reveal his or her reason for not voting–apparently it’s a good enough reason to justify an abstained vote. Get informed and make an imperfect decision–your life isn’t going to be determined by the next ASI President, so vote even if you’re unsure who you would want as your President next year.
How lame.
Did Cal Poly get its money back from the contracted college student government polling company–for a company that has been in the business of assisting universities with online polls for (what did the article say?) a decade or more, you’d think they’d have the system down pretty well–so with delayed election breakdown of 1 week, I’m pretty sure that campus money spent to hold the election was a waste. With the budget cuts, can we really afford this?