Erin Rennie. The posture of a winner! Photo Gerald Deo

Tim beat me to the punch, but I swear my draft was here first. I decided to vote for Erin Rennie yesterday at around 12:15. Tim’s got good reasons to choose her; I feel similarly. She’s got council experience, reams of brains, and a far better personality for leadership and engagement than either Matt or Mike. It doesn’t take much to see through some of her more humorous polemics to realize that Erin actually gets politics, and gets students. She wont be beset by her adversaries’ respective problems. Problems which to me, are a fair bit too serious to just hold your nose and vote for. She’s the best for the job. Simple enough. Other people have told me that while Erin Rennie is the best candidate, there’s no point endorsing her because she can’t win. To this I call bullshit. Look to the sidebar poll – yeah it’s utterly unscientific, but I don’t think people were joking when they chose Erin in the poll. Erin for the Win!!

My other endorsements coming soon.


13 Comments so far

  1. Anonymous on January 18, 2008 9:56 pm

    Erin is great…she has done very well in the debates, and has separated herself from all of the other candidates. My criticism of her endorsement here has nothing to do with her. I just think that we should keep in mind that it is easy to run for President when you have nothing to lose. Both Matthew and Michael have invested a lot in this race. Erin is running as a joke, has no real platform, and has not had to answer the tough questions. She hasn’t been tested, because no one (until now apparently) has taken her seriously. To elect a candidate who is running as a joke and has not really had to take a serious stance on anything is dangerous. We all love Erin…but before we crown her shouldn’t we at least find out seriously what she is all about?

  2. AD Holm on January 18, 2008 11:19 pm

    Word on the Street is that she’s running for seriously now. And well… if she was this good as a joke, I’m sure as hell voting for her now that she’s serious.

  3. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 1:11 am

    Honestly, Erin has quite a good understanding of the AMS and student populations. She has worked in the AUS and the Arts Senator. I don’t see her being less qualified than either Michael or Naylor.

  4. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 2:38 am

    I think she could probably whip up a platform that is more feasible and responsible than any of the other candidates in a quick hour. It is important for the president to have a deep knowledge of the issues, to have strong leadership qualities, to be able to understand the dynamics of the student population, and to be able to voice her opinion effectively.
    Erin does this best.

  5. also on January 19, 2008 3:15 am

    before i thought erin was the best candidate too (intelligent, coherent, committed, passionate etc.) but wasnt going to vote for her because i thought it was a joke.
    now knowing that shes running fo’ real i’ll definately vote for her
    also, i’ll do whatever maayan tells me too….

  6. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 3:36 am

    Erin? Give me a break. I’d rather not have someone that prioritizes drinking as the representative of our society. Yes, she’s authoritative, demanding of respect, intelligent, good looking, and so forth. You’re failing to realize though, that she knows less about the issues than even Mike Duncan. I can’t see what advantage she has over him really.

    As for Matt, well, I don’t think anyone’s really considering voting for him, except for maybe his groupies.

    I’m voting for Mike. He’ll be able to enthuse students and get them excited about the AMS. The simple fact of the matter is that Erin won’t.

  7. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 4:16 am

    Go Erin! we’ve been missing a female prez at the AMS for a while now

  8. maayan kreitzman on January 19, 2008 5:11 am

    Hahaaa. I like your message Also 7:15. If only I knew who this willing subject was…

    As for Erin being all about drinking and not knowing the issues: the former may be superficially true, and the latter I believe to be downright wrong. She hasn’t actually written a serious platform. But as Spencer said in a previous comment thread, the platform isn’t everything. The personality, their leadership ability, their capability to involve, speak, listen, engage and inspire, and their integrity is worth way more. Erin’s got those, and that’s why she’s got my genuine support.

  9. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 8:34 am

    all this politiking is oh so tiring…
    how about a different endorsement
    me + you + the tahitan holiday package with the his and her jet-skis?

  10. Mike on January 19, 2008 10:48 am

    If the “serious” candidates were rather close in their appeal, an endorsement like this would be harmless fun. But from all indications Matt is not cut out for the job of president. While Mike has his (lack of) issues, the choice between these two is obvious. It seems wrong for the premier serious VFM site to endorse a joke candidate.

  11. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 8:03 pm

    Regardless if it is “wrong” or not, Erin is the premier candidate. Both Mike and Matt are not leaders. They may possess experience in council but from my observations both seem better suited to work behind the scenes with the AMS worrying about policy and other redundant AMS stuff. Rather than scoffing at the UBC insiders for their enodrsement of Erin Rennie, we should scoff at the complete inadequacy of the two ‘serious’ candidates. You better believe the hype, Erin Rennie will be the next AMS president.

  12. Mike on January 19, 2008 8:16 pm

    For anyone who actually thinks Erin will win, I will lay 5:1 against. Email me.

  13. Anonymous on January 19, 2008 10:06 pm

    I read the Knoll’s endorsement today, and serious critiques of joke candidates. I agree with mike that this VFM made a funny choice for endorsement, but i am voting with the Knoll on rodrigo.

Name (required)

Email (required)


Speak your mind

Spam prevention powered by Akismet