That Girl from Derwent dwells on the value of religion this Christmas.
That Girl from Derwent has learned a few more things about prejudice since moving up North.
That Girl From Derwent reckons if you're going to be offensive, you should find a better reason.
That Girl from Derwent considers why it is that some words have wider implications than others.
I've prepared a few quick summaries of the campaigns and the odds of victory for each candidate as I see it. It's worth saying that for the full-time officers (Academic aside), this year has seen an extraordinarily good number of nominations and some very good policies and campaigns. It's just a shame that the part-time positions haven't seen the same competition - it will be interesting to see where the 2010/2011 executive comes from.
Unless RON pulls off something spectacular here, I think we're looking at a second term for Charlie.
Whilst Ed and Sharpy have strong college-level backing, I think given Lewis and George have managed to raise their profile in recent months to an almost comparable level. George had good answers at hustings and ran a very democracy-heavy campaign, but rather ironically, democracy doesn't win votes: promises of the next best thing on campus do. Lewis has run a shrewd and very visible campaign and countered his opponents' policies well, particularly with his promises of free sandwiches in response to Ed's Subway. Sharpy has had appealing policies on services but hasn't offered much in the way of democracy. Given the press, publicity, the policies and the performances at hustings, I reckon Lewis has the edge over the 'college boys', particularly as (in my experience) Halifax students don't vote. Despite being the outsider, George still could draw a respectable number of votes, we'll have to see what tonight brings...
Looking at this one purely on policies and experience, it's Langrish's race to lose, but Tim's more personable approach and popular base could see him win. Voters particularly keen to see a break in any perceived YUSU clique could also come through for Tim. Bushby and Bradley have clearly been the outsiders from the start and particularly following the beating all three other candidates gave Bushby in the Nouse/YSTV debate. Bushby and Bradley's campaign publicity has been practically non-existent on campus and I think that will prove to be the nail in the coffin for them both. Brace yourselves for a close Langrish/Ngwena finish.
All the candidates seemed to perform pretty well at hustings. Experience and policy was mixed for all, but with almost uniform criticism of Alex Lacy's work - I can't imagine this losing them many votes. Johnson and Scott obviously have a lot of grass-roots support from the clubs and teams but their policies are a little bland and seem to be pretty much what the aims of the organisation are anyway. Sned could well garner a lot of support from teams and captains that he's worked with in the past in his reporting role and has obviously learned a lot about York Sport without being directly involved. His "fresh eyes" approach could prove to be a big winner but ultimately I believe he'll lose out on the popularity front. Viking Kath's departure from the race does leave rather a bit of a policy gap at the fun end of sport. Leahy offers something of a compromise between both approaches. Pushing both experience, connections, greater inclusion and the usual "more, better", Leahy is perhaps what York Sport needs after a year of such drastic change. At the end of the day, Scott's popularity and highly visible campaign will probably see her win the job though.
Right from the start of campaigning, Ella has impressed a lot of people by writing and speaking both very confidently and knowledgeably on the key issues and her particularly pertinent policies. What she may lack in experience, she has more than made up for with her hustings performance. Rhianna's Special K campaign has been very visible on campus, but her policies seemed rather like the cereal: supposedly good for you but with little flavour and leave you feeling like you've not really eaten anything at all. I'm sure she would do an admirable job as SA Officer, particularly with her RAG and YUSU background, I had just hoped for a more political campaign from her. Rory, running for his second term, is the "safe pair of hands" if you like. His experience in the societies part of this new role will prove invaluable but a lot of the promises he makes don't address the concerns of Joe Student. He may also face opposition, like Langrish, from those voting against a perceived YUSU clique (particularly with him being Burton's right-hand man) and also from any enemies he may have made of the JCRCs and the societies who had their funding cut during his year in office. Despite this, Rory is undoubtedly the favourite with his silver tongue, colourful campaign and well-established campus célèbre.
For my money, Welfare Officer will see the closest battle for a full-time position. Jenny Coyle, despite her best efforts and support from Vanbrugh, has failed to raise her profile sufficiently above "that Tanning Soc girl" which is a shame because some of her policies are very appealing. The two front-runners are clearly Pallas and Humphrys - two guys with similar YUSU backgrounds, similar stances and even similar publicity. Where one outperforms the other, the other quickly compensates. Housing and STIs are the big issues for these two, with slightly different approaches from both candidates. I'm very hesitant to try and pick a favourite in this race as it is so close, but if my arm were twisted then I'd have to say Ben might just have the edge.
And here's a quick roundup of the odds for the part-time positions and Chair of Union Council:
LGBT Officer
RAG Officer
Campaigns Officer
Disability Officer, Entertainments Officer, Environment and Ethics Officer, Student Action Officer, and Women's Officer
Racial Equality Officer
Chair of Union Council
I would love to bet with you every week! You quote about a 90% book everytime...
Grant Bradley 20-1
Charles Bushby 10-1
Tom D. Langrish 3-1
Tim Ngwena 7-2
OMG, so we have a 25% chance of none of them winning..! Oh well, still better than a pirate I guess...
Rory Shanks as a "safe pair of hands?" What planet are you on? He was also oh-so-very silver-tongued in the Josh Chambers URY interview, wasn't he? It's all about whether Ella or Rhianna have done enough to unship him: it's theirs to lose.
I would generally say that it's the current Sabb's to lose - they know about the current issues, have been doing the job and won a previous campaign. With things like the society forum, promises of 1-2-1s for societies for grant allocation etc, there's a good chance that Rory will do well. I would have put the three at slightly closer odds though.
And I suspect that 80-1 is a little high... 8-1 is more likely
once again, stellar work from the yorker here dealing in cold hard facts, disregarding personal opinion and conjecture.
#5: Of course it has a great deal of Mr. Mitchell's opinion in it! It's a blog which is meant to pretty much entirely reflect the opinions of the person who wrote it.
Ok, Mitch's odds may not add up, but that isn't the be-all-and-end-all of the article really is it? He's giving his opinion on who he thinks will win, which he is very entitled to do.
"once again, stellar work from the yorker here dealing in cold hard facts, disregarding personal opinion and conjecture."- yeah, because it's not as if Nouse and Vision don't ever sensationalise anything or speculate on things is it?!!
On the odds thing, that's my mistake - I'm not a gambler and couldn't remember whether the odds should add up to more or less than 100%. Either way, they compare with each other at least. Or, if you like, attribute the remaining percentage points to the apocalypse occurring during the results night.
Slightly wrong on 3. Not bad going.
You must log in to submit a comment.