SBP candidates are human...

I am tired of hearing about how great the candidates are. I know each to have many quality traits. I however know each to be mortal as some of you may not believe. I would like to point out where each lacks. With the exception of platform, it is a given that all SBP candidates are required to have no substantial platform and overall just repeat a few buzzwords over and over. We will go alphabetical by last name.

Nick Adams- Keeps talking about communication and how hes been a great communication chair of Exec. This is crap, Senate approached Exec during SSFAB voting to get the Comm team to go out and get student opinion. The Exec Communication team and Conner said no. If any member of SGA wants to get information from the Student Body the Comm team should be excited to help. I suspect that the questions were going to be about Greek life and Nick did not want himself associated with anything Anti-Greek.

Terry Dike- If I understand correctly Terry is a member of the track team. I know that almost all athletic teams practice un-Godly amounts each week. This hold especially true for our excellent track team that continues to improve and get better. No doubt this will be true next year when we are hosting the NCAA championships in track. How can we expect an SBP to be practicing each day and still devoted wholly to the position. Granted, I am not sure if he plans on running (unintended pun) next year but I do believe he has another year or eligibility.

Mark Gold- Besides being the candidate with the most glaring absence of a platform (I know I promised not to speak of this seeing as none have a coherent platform but his lack of a platform is exceptionally impressive) Mark has virtually no experience in the field of legislation or execution of legislation. Mark has no experience in any real governmental position. He was chair of Fish Aides. Fish Aides is simply an SBP machine that produces ideal candidates each year and more times than not they win. They serve no real purpose other than this, at least not that I can see.

Dustin McKnight- I will admit he is the candidate that I know least about. He worked with Rich Pontious in Student Services this last year. As much good as Dustin did I can guarantee that Rich did 99% of the work. The fact that I know little about him may be a good thing or a bad thing (I am sure he considers it a good thing).

Ryan Rieger- Ryan has not put his name on any significant or controversial legislation this session. Ryan does a fine job handling himself in Senate but this glaring hole really makes me wonder about him. I sincerely doubt he supported the way every single piece of legislation was handled and so I wish he would have spoken up a bit more. This lack of stances and lack of controversial debate makes me hesitate a bit.

Jody Sanmuen- Jody is awesome, I really like the girl. However she was elected to the position of Northside Senate and resigned to take over an RHA position. As noble as this is I do think that she should have remained in her position that the students elected her to.

I mean none of this as disrespect to any of the candidates. I simply mean to put this out there as these people are human and are not that great of candidates. As much as I like these people on a personal level I do not think any of them are very qualified for the position of SBP. I do not think anyone on campus this year is qualified either (except maybe Balla Jim Reed). Whenever you get elected to a leadership position you are never qualified at first, however in the position you begin to shine and take control of the responsibilities. In conclusion, I think they all suck equally and a bunch. Whoever you vote for will not accomplish anything and it will continue the cycle of slouch SBPs (Conner don't sell yourself short, you are a tremendous slouch :-).

Candidates or staff, feel free to respond I could care less. Nobody reads this anyways.