Ignoring the issues

Every four years, society must endure the mud-slinging contest that some may refer to as the presidential elections. For months, we are bombarded through every form of the media with petty details about "the opposing candidate," none of which have anything to do with politics. And when you finally think you're about to receive legitimate information, for instance, at the presidential debates, both parties dance around the questions they are asked, and seem to avoid saying anything political.

As a student at UB, I have observed not much is different in a college election. If you have been anywhere within the vicinity of the Student Union in the past few days, I'm sure you know what I am talking about. It is beyond annoying to me that for three days it is impossible to walk through the Union without being practically jumped by candidate after candidate.

Perhaps it is due to my value of personal space, and dignity for that matter, that having a complete stranger coming within inches from my face asking "Did you vote? Vote for us!" over and over for three days is aggravating. I suppose it may be different if someone who isn't dressed like a professional hooker walked up to me, calmly, and offered me some useful information. But such is not the case.

This is why none of the SA candidates received my vote this year.

It seems to me that if a party genuinely cared about the issues they claim to be addressing, wearing slutty outfits or colors that damage your retinas would not top the priority list. Don't get me wrong, the topics of reformation the parties bring up are valid points, and are definitely worth advertising. So why not focus on that?

If a party really wanted to stand out, why not try doing something valuable with the time they waste loitering in the Union pestering everyone?

I have seen too many students try to slink by the line of candidates all too willing to cram their poorly prepared slogans down your throat, but to no avail - nobody is safe.

The fact is, there is no escaping the migraine-inducing, in-your-face, don't-think-just-vote-for-me campaign strategy. And I do use the word "strategy" very loosely, because generally, that would imply a plan devised that incorporates intelligence at some point.

Why not set up tables and offer pamphlets or conversation about what the party intends to do if elected? If people were actually interested, they would seek out information, especially if it was readily accessible. There are always events and tables set up in the Union, and I have yet to see one that doesn't attract interest.

Coincidence? I think not. If people are curious (and people always are), they will come to you. Really. There is a reason why telemarketers call people and not the other way around. I don't want to be harassed at home with mindless jargon about switching my cable service, just like I don't want to be harassed by empty platforms while walking to class.

While this seems like a viable solution, unfortunately, SA regulations do not allow for this. For every logical strategy that should be taken advantage of, there is a rule prohibiting such action. I suppose, in a way, the candidates are forced to succumb to the mindless tactics of not really presenting any information, which is tragic. But on the other hand, most of the flyers I see do not say what they're about (which is allowed). They simply just put a name to a face.

As na??ve and unrealistic as I may be, I can't help but think that if these parties truly cared about the students or about improving UB, they would join forces. Instead, they are pitted against each other in the most trivial, immature acts like "dorm storming" and the he-said-she-said game. Give me a break.

This is a university, why don't we give being professional a try? Why do the parties get so riled up if they hear another candidate saying something bad about them to a voter? What should make them angry are the injustices they are allegedly fighting against.