SU election results

Jonny Arson

2 recounts FFS! :rolleyes: TBH if that girl has any integrity she would do the decent thing by giving up and admitting defeat. You can guarantee that if she wins the next recount Redmond will ask for a recount himself and we will probably end up the situation where they're still squabbling over it by next years sabbat elections.

There should only be one recount allowed in future. Enter into constitution please!

GusherING

Zane from MTV2 wrote:

2 recounts FFS! :rolleyes: TBH if that girl has any integrity she would do the decent thing by giving up and admitting defeat. You can guarantee that if she wins the next recount Redmond will ask for a recount himself and we will probably end up the situation where they're still squabbling over it by next years sabbat elections.

There should only be one recount allowed in future. Enter into constitution please!

Well they use the Irish Electoral Act as the rules for running an election, so I guess if that doesn't ban recounts, why should the SU?

MaxBax

singingstranger wrote:

For the benefit of those who for someone reason don't want to go to www.ucdsu.net :

President
Winner: Dan Hayden
Enda Duffy, Órla Ní Threasaigh, RON

Deputy President
Winner: Dave Curran
RON

Education
Winner: Brian Doyle
Kate O'Hanlon

Welfare
Winner: Barry Colfer
Michelle Killeen

Ents
Winner: Dave Redmond (pending another recount, I'm told, having won by 9)
Holly Irvine, Brian Canny, James Hartshorn, Enda Donohue, Eoghan Ó Duinn

Seemingly the recount, where Morgan Shelley had planned to adjudicate over every single ballot paper individually (thereby examining all spoiled votes again and checking their actual validity, and so on), wasn't really as pedantic as he would have liked because he couldn't secure the services of a lot of his counting team. So the promised thorough recount wasn't quite as thorough as it could have been, and Holly made back 13 votes of her 22 deficit... logic would dictate that if whatever other proportion of the votes was counted as pedantically as that which went under Morgan's eye, she could well make another 10 back.

This one, frankly, is going to run.

thanks you're sound.

MaxBax

Zane from MTV2 wrote:

2 recounts FFS! :rolleyes: TBH if that girl has any integrity she would do the decent thing by giving up and admitting defeat. You can guarantee that if she wins the next recount Redmond will ask for a recount himself and we will probably end up the situation where they're still squabbling over it by next years sabbat elections.

There should only be one recount allowed in future. Enter into constitution please!

have to say i completely, if not totally, disagree with you.

tintinr35

MaxBax wrote:

have to say i completely, if not totally, disagree with you.

WTF!!!! if it wasnt for the ban on personal abuse id b forced to possibly, if not definatly call u a spa,
but of course i cant cause of the PA ban

besty

tintinr35 wrote:

WTF!!!! if it wasnt for the ban on personal abuse id b forced to possibly, if not definatly call u a spa,
but of course i cant cause of the PA ban

Nicely loopholed.

MaxBax

tintinr35 wrote:

WTF!!!! if it wasnt for the ban on personal abuse id b forced to possibly, if not definatly call u a spa,
but of course i cant cause of the PA ban

lol.

pigeonbutler

Zane from MTV2 wrote:

2 recounts FFS! :rolleyes: TBH if that girl has any integrity she would do the decent thing by giving up and admitting defeat. You can guarantee that if she wins the next recount Redmond will ask for a recount himself and we will probably end up the situation where they're still squabbling over it by next years sabbat elections.

There should only be one recount allowed in future. Enter into constitution please!

Each count has gotten steadily more accurate and comprehensive. The two candidates now have the same number of votes. Redmond wins at the moment under the provision in Electoral Acts which breaks ties by looking back at the 1st Count. That is the tightest possible margin. 1 single vote misplaced out of the 4600 would change the result. For your information up until 20 minutes before the final declaration some votes were found in the wrong piles so there is obviously still some room for error in the count.

Are you saying we should say "To hell with what the real result the peole voted for is, let's just go with who came out on top from an initial count"

As regards it being the "decent thing" to admit defeat: that is outrageous. The Redmond camp have no problem with Holly calling a recount. They know that if the situation was reversed they would absolutely look for a recount. When a margin is this small you have to ensure you are 100% certain that you get the right result.

Oh and anyone who says Holly will be a disaster is being very unfair and doesn't know the girl too well. They must be getting brainwashed by the campaigning of the Redmond team including the comment by the current Ents Officer that Redmonds opponents "weren't qualified" for the job.

Jonny Arson

pigeonbutler wrote:

Are you saying we should say "To hell with what the real result the peole voted for is, let's just go with who came out on top from an initial count"

Personally, I feel one recount is enough. This could go on forever literally (and probably will go on for a long time). You have to draw the line somewhere.

pigeonbutler wrote:

As regards it being the "decent thing" to admit defeat: that is outrageous. The Redmond camp have no problem with Holly calling a recount. They know that if the situation was reversed they would absolutely look for a recount. When a margin is this small you have to ensure you are 100% certain that you get the right result.

After 2 recounts? Again I have to say the line has to be drawn somehwere. There will always be errors at every recount, it humans doing the counting not robots, you can only get the right result if you go through each vote like comb and spend 2 minutes analysing each vote. Obviously that hasn't happened since both recounts have given out different results.

I don't believe what I said is outrageous. She lost the initial vote, she lost the recount and she lost the second recount on preferences. Are you saying if she loses the 3rd recount on a small margin that she should ask for another recount? I would do the right thing and admit defeat in that situation. The recounts have to stop and just because the UCDSU uses the Irish Electoral act doesn't mean it's the right way to go about it.

singingstranger

Put it this way: if you'd lost an election, after all the preferences and stuff, by 22 votes, and the counters themselves had called a recount; and then you'd lost it by 9, and then by 2, and then by nothing; and if there was every chance that there was still human error involved (viz-a-vis the misallocation of votes just twenty minutes before a result was declared), and you had nothing to lose and a job for a year to gain, simply by asking the votes to be counted again...

...what would you do?

Personally I think they should keep going until they get two identical results because that's the only reasonable way of knowing for sure that everything has finally been accounted for. As far as I can see, you can't just say "nah, we'll just take that guy" when the people could genuinely have chosen someone else. You're dealing with the fundamental democratic voice of the 4200 people who voted here, and you can't just write it off when it's clear that there were mistakes etc. in the first couple of attempts at counting.

On a side point, what an example to show that literally one vote can change everything! Personal example, I voted Canny 1, Donohue 2 and Irvine 3. Had I just swapped Donohue and Irvine (which I really, really may have) the entire result would now be different.

Use your vote, kiddies...

dajaffa

Just for the record, each candidate can ask for up to 3 recounts each, provided that the latest recount has a closer/different result, so if Holly lost again, she couldn't ask for a recount. I've no problem with the recounts. There has never been an election this tight for the SU.

singingstranger

If this is so she's got one more in her bag and I would assume that the next one would be it: she didn't call the first one when the gap was 22, it was done by the Returning Officer himself, for posterity and just to verify the result.

MaxBax

tintinr35 wrote:

WTF!!!! if it wasnt for the ban on personal abuse id b forced to possibly, if not definatly call u a spa,
but of course i cant cause of the PA ban

spa.

Chinafoot

MaxBax wrote:

spa.

Bye Bye MaxBax.

I would say I'm sorry to see you go but you have contributed absolutely nothing to this forum.

tintinr35

peachypants wrote:

Bye Bye MaxBax.

I would say I'm sorry to see you go but you have contributed absolutely nothing to this forum.

did it take him from midnight last night until 3 o clock today to figure out that!!

any word on the recount yesterday for ents??

Jonny Arson

singingstranger wrote:

Put it this way: if you'd lost an election, after all the preferences and stuff, by 22 votes, and the counters themselves had called a recount; and then you'd lost it by 9, and then by 2, and then by nothing; and if there was every chance that there was still human error involved (viz-a-vis the misallocation of votes just twenty minutes before a result was declared), and you had nothing to lose and a job for a year to gain, simply by asking the votes to be counted again...

...what would you do?

I would give admit defeat and stop wasting people's time by having 87,942 recounts.

singingstranger wrote:

Personally I think they should keep going until they get two identical results because that's the only reasonable way of knowing for sure that everything has finally been accounted for. As far as I can see, you can't just say "nah, we'll just take that guy" when the people could genuinely have chosen someone else. You're dealing with the fundamental democratic voice of the 4200 people who voted here, and you can't just write it off when it's clear that there were mistakes etc. in the first couple of attempts at counting.

Again as I asked where do you draw the line on this? At this stage it will go on forever. If Holly wins the next recount by 2 votes, Dave will ask for a recount and he could win it by 2 votes and Holly may ask for another recount.. yada yada... so on so forth and the 2007/2008 ents officer will be elected bythe time its sorted.

singingstranger wrote:

On a side point, what an example to show that literally one vote can change everything! Personal example, I voted Canny 1, Donohue 2 and Irvine 3. Had I just swapped Donohue and Irvine (which I really, really may have) the entire result would now be different.

Use your vote, kiddies...

Couldn't agree more. I switched Redmond from my 3rd pref to my 2nd at last moment.... very tight but I personally hate counts going on for ages.


In saying all this I think it's looking like a very strong sabbat team next year. Only candidate I wouldn't be overwhelmed by would be Brian Doyle as it seems to me he wants to suck up to the college authorities rather than fight for us after all the lies and general crap from them over the past while. However no problems from me with the rest of the elected officers.

dajaffa

It won't go on forever as each candidate can only request 3 recounts each. If Holly loses again, that's it, she can't ask for another one as the election obviously can't get any closer with her still losing. If Dave loses, he'll ask for a recount, but Holly will only have 1 left, and Dave too. The recounts aren't limitless, but it's wrecking my head that people are complaining. It's never been this close, and I doubt any of us will see one this close ever again... Hope it gets sorted out before the break though...

Chinafoot

Zane from MTV2 wrote:

If Holly wins the next recount by 2 votes, Dave will ask for a recount and he could win it by 2 votes and Holly may ask for another recount.. yada yada... so on so forth

Well if that happened there should most definitely be recounts as clearly there was an error made along the way.

Would you rather we had someone in office that wasn't rightfully elected?

tintinr35

the whole idea of PR-STV is that each preference you make on your ballot is significant, otherwise it would just be first past the post!!

dajaffa

Ne1 know what happened when they went through the spoiled votes today?

getyourENDAway

dajaffa wrote:

Ne1 know what happened when they went through the spoiled votes today?

i heard that after they checked the spoiled votes holly was 1 ahead of dave and i would imagine that he will appeal the descision............the story continues

zap

Its IAB Time

singingstranger

zap wrote:

Its IAB Time

No it's not, it's Chico time. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. :rolleyes:

Red Alert

i really wish Dave or RON wins - holly would be dreadful. i wonder should the SU's of the country buy the ill-fated voting machines off the government to deal with this sort of crap?

dajaffa

I've actually been thinking the same thing. It would be a great idea for all concerned for the government to allow larger colleges to use the machines as a test run for when the machines are used in general elections in the future.

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how things go cause Morgan refused Holly a recount, that's why they only went through spoiled votes. He may allow them to go through those again, but from what I've seen, Holly has far more to gain from those than Dave so he may not bother.

Also, he has no grounds to appeal to the IAB. Holly won fair and square, he's the one that broke the rules. I can only see a sucessful appeal against Dave, and right now there's no point as he's lost, for now anyway.

Annasopra

Have to say it's a big disspointment that Enda lost and the students of UCD have voted consevative voices into the SU

Blush_01

Dan's hardly the most conservative voice UCD's ever seen. That's nonsense. Just because he's not the Auditor of Labour Youth doesn't mean Dan's going to sit back and do nothing.

I really hope Holly doesn't get it. I don't like or trust the girl. She has very little regard for other people, from what I've seen in my *edit* limited *edit* dealings with her.

Red Alert

i'm sure there will plenty of (not) nights in bondi but not much else.

zap

I know Holly quite well and she would be an excellent ents officer, so don't judge someone if ya don't know them

passive

Well Steve from down the road is kinda nice so i figure he'd make a good president...

But.. y'know... most people objecting to her are talking about their opinion of her manifesto, campaign, policies and general suitability vs. everyone elses..
Though i don't specifically remember why i wrote her off.. too many ents candidates to think back on.. She was pretty unimpressive anyway and perhaps the unmemorability was part of the problem..