One flaw in the situation: the lazy sons or daughters of bitches need to be chosen.
I guess they could have solved it with a game of cards or a duel but that would have been too easy and therefore once a year university wide elections are being held. So far so good, aside from the fact that to have elections you need voters, and that's where the plot thickens.
Last year only 17% of students at the University of Amsterdam voted, and that is one of the lowest turnouts in the country. I believe this is mostly because the Amsterdam student bodies are among the most invisible, although the fact that we Amsterdam students actually have a life (unlike those damn Leiden people) might also play a part.
Personally, I like politics and I feel you should always vote, if only to be able to feel utterly betrayed by your political party the day after the results are announced, but I generally can't be bothered to vote for these student bodies either. Last year I felt guilty and did vote, but I voted on the guy with the nicest smile on the posters so I'm not sure that's how the system is supposed to be. This year again none of my friends are candidates (all: yeey!) so I'm down again to having to pick one of the 40 total unknowns on the different lists.
Crap.
Anyway, I went through all the candidates' descriptions of themselves and managed to pick out two. Since none of the candidates really had any surprising points (more freedom! more vacation! more money!) it's down to looks and general writing skills again.
(drum roll)
Candidate 1:
- pro's; seems to want to make studying more difficult.
- con's: studies language (not a language but language in general), which can't be good. Also, is member of a party that my buddy the Squirrel describes as 'the cool kids'
- not sure yet: makes word jokes
Candidate 2:
- pro's: history student (we's smart folk you know), also made the effort to make up a big comparison between a university and flying an airplane
- con's: made up a big comparison between a university and an airplane
- not sure yet: independent candidate. feels like throwing away your vote doesn't it?
So to make it all as democratic as possible; faithul readers (that would be you Merel and Jari) can vote which of the two and then I'll probably ignore the result but at least we had fun.
8 comments:
I am voting for Candidate 2 as it stands, although to really have an opinion I should know their names and I am a bit too lazy to go into the link and fine out all about them. I think he's the prettier one fo the two, and also: WHY would you want to make studying more difficult? That sounds like silly talk to me. And, ehm, well, I really only have looks as my point. I will get back to you on this.
Okay, I haven't been able to find anything more about candidate 1, but candidate 2 is called Robert Flierman, and that is just not on. I am going for Klaas Stutjes, because that is the most awful name for politics ever!! But I still think 2 is pretty.
Candidate 1's first name is Jelrik (which is much more nice sounding than mr. Stutjes name) also, look wise I tend to dissagree with you. Still: candidate 1 is ahead.
2! candidate 2!
wow. I didn't even have to work for that one. Awesome.
Candiate 2 for these reasons:
1)Airplanes are pretty cool, no matter in what context.
2)He looks more prone of going bonkers after studying too much and thus he'll some point snap and force through some totally whack idea in the student body. And you'll be blogging it. And I get to read the post.
go cybbis!! Support me in my quest for making the cute guy with the bad bad bad metaphor the winner!! Even if it is for completely different reasons, I am still happy with your support!!
sigh. ok
1) candidate 2 (despite his uncute cuteness, which I do not deny he has) is not the cutest guy. Candidate 1 is.
2) ehm... the voting deadline was yesterday and my internet connection didn't work at home so I didn't get to vote at all.
3) IF I had voted, I probably would've gone for nr. 2 after all.
4) But if Candidate 1 reads this: mail me.
Post a Comment