Interactive | What the freshman TCU Senate candidates sent

Your name

Wed Apr 15 2009 04:10

irony of ironies: ecom is run by a person who has once disqualified from an election because he cheated is now having major problems with its own cheats.

Aaron Bartel

Tue Apr 14 2009 14:14

Clearly our "Daily Staff Member" is not a daily staff member and is joking. He/she is probably getting a kick out of your response.

A knowledgeable member of the community

Tue Apr 14 2009 13:23

To "daily staff member":

Just so you know-- Shantal Richards and Jon Danzig (there's no "h" in his name) are also running. I don't think it's fair to leave out these two candidates from your list of "real contenders"; seeing as this is going to be election number 3, I don't think anybody could claim to know what will happen. If you legitimately are a daily staff member, I would think that you would know the names of all thirteen candidates. Just saying.

Daily Staff Member

Tue Apr 14 2009 11:36

Well, John, we picked these eight because we figured they along with Aaron, Kate, and Nunu are the only real contenders for the seven seats. So you see, it wasn't an arbitrary choice.

Jumbolaya

Tue Apr 14 2009 02:13

So the bottom line is Elliott is corrupt and Manuel is a moron. Or is it?

Aaron Bartel

Tue Apr 14 2009 02:08

I don't really know how to post my messages, but if it is for the completion of this whole openness thing, anyone in my facebook group can post them. I didn't send out a message after 12:32 am that day, so they wont be interesting. Sorry :)

Matt Skibinski

Tue Apr 14 2009 01:27

Jon: I've had a few questions about this, so I wanted to clarify why we chose to show these particular screen shots. After the initial story broke, our reporters tried to track down as many screen shots as they could of candidates' messages to supporters. We attempted to contact members of every candidate's Facebook group, and these are the screenshots we were able to generate from that effort.

We posted all of the messages that we were able to find -- even the seemingly innocuous ones -- so that readers could see all of the information our reporters were able to uncover thus far and decide for themselves which candidates' messages were over the line and which were not. We also posted a note encouraging readers to submit any messages that were missing from the list.

I certainly understand some of the criticisms of this approach. I would have preferred to have waited until we could secure every message sent by any candidate on election day before posting this feature. However, since the election was today, we made a judgment call to post the information we have been able to uncover thus far in the most unbiased way possible: by showing the exact messages, verbatim. The messages with no ill intent certainly speak for themselves; the more questionable messages are for the readers to interpret.

Jon Danzig

Mon Apr 13 2009 23:33

My name is Jon Danzig. I sent out an initial message at 12 AM telling people to vote, but I also made sure to check with ECOM before I sent anything else. And when they assured me that the mess-up wasn't an issue and that voting would proceed as planned, I didn't send out a message to the members of my Facebook group.

That said, neither did some of the people in this list, and yet their initial messages, which simply tell people to vote, are posted here in screenshot form. If the Daily is going to do something like this, I don't understand why they picked these arbitrary eight instead of everyone.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 22:41

I can't believe this is such a big deal. Freshies won't shut up about it.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 18:54

LOLOL really? why are they putting up the messages they sent out? this does not need to be so dramatic! it is a college student government election. ha ha ha.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 13:32

The best part is that the ecom voting website hasn't been working all day to day...

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 13:10

Status updates crossed the line. Go **** yourself.

Yo Name

Mon Apr 13 2009 12:55

Oh please. The messages were sent to members of a public facebook group that anyone could join. By political candidates.

It's like saying posting a Barack Obama campaign e-mail would be a violation of privacy. Stupid.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 12:37

This is a total violation of privacy. I don't care if Facebook friends of rhe candidates sent them in willingly, these were personal messages sent out to supporters. I just don't like it.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 12:13

Ha the first comment is clearly Manuel Guzman, you can tell by the preposterous overuse of exclamation marks, indignant tone and general drama queen-ness...

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 11:35

...there is nothing disgraceful here. These are the words of the individual candidates. They wrote everything here, so they ought to stand by it.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 10:54

Tomas Garcia was in a different situation -- his name was messed up initially, and he was told that the records for any votes that were cast for him in the beginning of the election disappeared. He only wanted the votes that were cast for him to be counted. He was not acting unethically, and his message is completely different from those of the other candidates.

Matt Skibinski

Mon Apr 13 2009 10:50

No name: We do have a screenshot of Tomas Garcia's message encouraging supporters to re-vote. Please e-mail blogs@tuftsdaily.com if you have access to any other messages not included in this feature.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 08:30

Gangsta Freshmen rigging they way into the TCU Senate!

Candidates found having encouraged their supporters to vote multiple times must be barred from running for the Senate. Corruption should not be condoned at Tufts. We are not in Washington D.C. where pork-barrel, kleptocratic politics run the show.

Your name

Mon Apr 13 2009 08:02

It is Jon Danzig. Perhaps he didn't send any messages to his supporters on Facebook?