Anonymous campaign falls short: so what went RON?

The ‘Re-open Nominations’ option on this year’s Presidential ballot enjoyed the most successful year in its history, according to statistics seen by the _Boar_.

The previous record, a total of 223 out of 4420 votes registered in 2009 was smashed by this year’s total, which reached some 752 votes out of 5456 in the first round – more than the number of votes obtained by fifth and sixth placed Aimen Burhan (420) and Tanmoy Sen (110) put together and some 14 percent of first choice votes.

The RON campaign was unsuccessful, however, in its aim of achieving the highest number of votes and ensuring another election. It was eliminated in the third stage of the Single Transferable Vote voting system, with the highest proportion of transferable votes being passed to joke candidate Aaron Bowater, although 69 percent of RON voters listed no further preferences. The redistribution of votes to Bowater saw him take second place from Binita Mehta, albeit by a margin of just 23. Had the RON option received the most votes overall then a by-election would have been triggered, most likely scheduled for the first few weeks of the third term.

The organisers of the RON campaign, who have had to remain anonymous on the grounds that campaigning to re-open the nominations could be a breach of Union by-laws, leafleted on campus and launched a controversial online campaign under the guide of one ‘Ron Pres’. They argued that a RON vote was a vital response to “an urgent democratic problem, whereby voters are asked to choose between just three serious presidential candidates this year, compared to nine last year.”

“We are absolutely protesting against joke candidates as well as serious candidates,” The campaign added, though Bowater, whose policies included the abolition of free range eggs and a Greggs bakery on campus, had declared that if elected he would select RON as his Vice President – a post which does not currently exist.

Marijn Nieuwenhuis, a postgraduate student who to voted for RON, told the _Boar _before the election that his decision was based upon “the issue of representation or the lack thereof”, adding “I do not think (or cannot recall) that previous presidential elections have ever witnessed such a low number of candidates.”

Latoya Ferns, a third-year PPE student, added that she voted RON as a way of “addressing the quality of the choice”. She noted that “there are more candidates to be had from within our community and indeed… a few who stepped down or were daunted by such a big decision at first will run again”. She also said that “it is possible to question the motives of candidates” who are currently running.

Other students are firmly against voting RON, however. Second-year Biomedical Sciences student Katy Braddick observed that “RON will produce candidates who are worse – if people couldn’t be bothered to run in the first place why will they be better than the candidates that could?”

“It effectively amounts to negative campaigning and I can’t help suspecting that will reflect badly on Union democracy if it goes through. It might provoke a flurry of copycat RONs in the future,” commented Andrew Burchell, a second-year History and French student.

‘Ron Pres’ was ebullient despite ultimate defeat. The campaign’s facebook page urged students to “remember through the overwhelming apathy and disdain, that we spoke out for a better choice, for more serious candidates, and for your representatives to care about student issues.”

The final results saw Nick Swain, who took 34 percent of first preferences, win the election, with Mehta and Bowater securing 18 percent of first round votes each. Burhan and Sen totalled 7 percent and 2 percent respectively.