ASUC-athon 2009: Done… NOT! Student Action swept the executive offices. Whoop-dee-freakin’ doo. Because, you know, the differences between Student Action and CalSERVE are so

Red Dragon the movie

marked and important. And like, Will Smelko, Tu Tran, John Tran and Dani Haber were all such substantial candidates with solid platforms. Good for you, guys. Seriously. May you be somewhat less incompetent than your predecessors.

Um, yeah. Now that that’s out of the way, here’s the full list of senators (in order of most votes):

1. Noah Stern (Student Action)
2. Eunice Kwon (CalSERVE)
3. Anish Gala (UNITE Greek/Student Action)
4. Nhu Nhu Nguyen (UNITE Greek/Student Action)
5. Sandra Cohen (APPLE Engineering/Student Action)
6. Jonathan Gaurano (Independent)
7. Cynthia Nava (CalSERVE)
8. Christina Oatfield (Cooperative Movement)
9. Sam Lee (APPLE Engineering/Student Action)
10. Minji Kim (Student Action)
11. Chris Franco (Independent)
12. Chaney Saephan (CalSERVE)
13. Huda Adem (Independent)
14. Rahul Patel (CalSERVE)
15. J.P. Shami (Student Action)
16. Parth Bhatt (Student Action)
17. Lean Deleon (CalSERVE)
18. Emily Carlton (SQUELCH!)
19. Ariel Boone (CalSERVE)
20. Viola Tang (CalSERVE)

And Hassan Khan won for student advocate. Congrats, folks. We’ll assume you earned it.

Student Action Sweeps ASUC Executive Offices [Daily Cal]

guest said:
Apr 17, 2009 at 7:21 pm

yeah, and reporting on the Daily Clog is SO in depth, nuanced and insightful.

Seriously, what’s with the snark? why not come up with interesting angles on the news? anyone can be nasty, that’s not journalism.

Christine Borden said:
Apr 17, 2009 at 7:54 pm

Pow! Zap! Zing!

Petros said:
Apr 17, 2009 at 11:08 pm

Since when has the Daily Cal ever been about journalism?

The snark is just like the vaunted slate ‘No Endorsement’ position the ‘lack of editorial’ board took: WEAK.

other guest said:
Apr 18, 2009 at 3:19 am

But The Clog isn’t the Daily Cal – it has no requirements for journalistic standards or appropriate reporting. It’s a BLOG – they can write whatever they want to here. Certainly this kind of opinion and snark should not appear in an entity that considers itself a proper newspaper (The Daily), but in an informal forum such as this, they should be allowed to report with whatever bias they want.

Petros said:
Apr 18, 2009 at 9:35 am

So “A Cal blog brought to you by The Daily Californian” means what? That the paper can make opinions (which are fine… on the editorial page) but not be held accountable simply b/c it’s on a ‘blog’?


If the Clog were to libel someone in this space, I wouldn’t want to be the lawyer that has to try to prove that the Clog and the paper are unrelated.

guest said:
Apr 18, 2009 at 10:50 am

the point isn’t the bias, but the lack of professionalism. Blogs can be informative, thoughtful, responsible – bloggers can take the opportunity that they have to educate others, to start meaningful discussions, or to produce really witty and biting satire.

Just saying, basically, “you all suck” doesn’t add anything to the conversation. It’s just lazy, and it encourages apathy.

me said:
Apr 19, 2009 at 10:15 pm

I would love to see a link to your blog/publication where you give more insight into the election results.
what line of meaningful discussion would you like to start?

Beetle said:
Apr 20, 2009 at 11:11 am

I dunno what the Daily Clog’s policy is on impersonating other commenters, but now’s a perfect time to define it!

I’m hardly shy about criticizing the Daily Cal under my own name.

Joseph said:
Apr 20, 2009 at 1:28 pm

Let’s face it. The student body didn’t vote for Student Action because they thought SA was substantial. They voted for SA because SA wasn’t CalSERVE.

I’m honestly not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I guess it’s good that CalSERVE got taught a lesson, so that they’ll think twice in the future before secretly forwarding emails while claiming neutrality.

On the other hand, I think it shows the brokenness of our campus’s 2-party system (much like that of our country’s 2-party system) when the only alternative to CalSERVE is the party that brought us the Oren Gabriel affair back in 2006. I’m not saying that all SA members are the same or that the current SA members are the same as those of 2006. But I think it’s a matter of concern when the student body’s only solution to corruption in one party is to elect the party whose corruption was a matter of discussion a couple of years ago.

Well, let’s see how long it takes before people boot out SA in favor of CalSERVE…

Christine Borden said:
Apr 20, 2009 at 4:35 pm

Beetle, we deleted the offending comment. Thanks for point us to it–the email address obviously wasn’t yours.

Beetle said:
Apr 20, 2009 at 5:39 pm

Thanks, Christine.

CalSERVE came to power in an SA backlash, too. That’s just the way the republican cookie crumbles.

corruption? said:
Jul 13, 2009 at 2:21 am

honestly, what makes you think these four elected officials from student action have anything to do with that so called “corruption” from a few years ago? none of them were even at cal when SA ran unopposed in 2006 and were only freshmen (well one was actually still in high school) when the SB51 bill to pay Oren Gabriel’s legal fees. these new group of sa is far different from whatever was in the past. how about we give them the chance they deserve

LM said:
Sep 4, 2009 at 8:45 pm

Yup, I saw we give em a chance! They’re doing pretty well so far!

fred perry pas cher said:
Mar 21, 2012 at 2:33 pm

Very well written article. I agree with you and I had sold off 75% of my equity unit trusts for the past 2 weeks.

fred perry polos said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 1:47 pm

Absolutely right. Going green is the future in every sense. Because if we don’t go green, then there might not be a future at all.