WRGW-SA Debate Report Card for the EVP Candidates

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of WRGW News.


Overall, I think Dobson had the best night by a small margin. Maxim had a great night too, but Goldstein and Binetti were far behind their competitors for different reasons.


Logan Dobson - I thought Logan's opening statement was unimpressive (despite his dramatic claim of its greatness before the debate). But Dobson had some of the best one-liners of the night, and reinforced his public persona as being 'anti-establishment.'

His responses to most of the questions were good, but not great. His response to the question "would you release formal written documentation on individual voting records?" was surprisingly 'no,' but he gave a weak justification in saying there are too many procedural votes (why not just keep voting records of formal bills?). Whether you like Logan, at least his answers were honest, which can't be said about the other candidates at all times. Dobson was also the only candidate with the courage to say that the Greek community has too much influence over the SA.

Dobson had a great closing statement, in which he said the EVP should be working harder than the SA president since they should be advocating and running the SA Senate.

As expected, Logan matched his usual SA Senate meeting chicanery by making jabs at other candidates, constantly grimacing, rolling his eyes, and making silly faces as his opponents were speaking. It was kind of refreshing to see, and added a lot of character to the debate but at the same time let's hope these aren't his natural reactions when meeting with President Knapp or Bob Chernak.

Grades:
Opening Statement: C
Closing Statement: A
Style: A-
Substance: A-
Final Grade: A-/B+
---
Rob Maxim - I honestly didn't have very high expectations for Maxim before the debate started, but he turned out to be extremely capable at defending himself.

His opening statement was too idealistic, and too similar to what we've heard in the past (how we need new leadership, what his role as EVP would be, etc).

He argued his points forcefully, and gave off the impression he knew what he was talking about. As the only non-SA senator, he had liberty of answering in hypotheticals when discussing how he would have voted in previous Senate legislation.

Out of all the candidates, Maxim was best at saying what students want to hear, like his position on Senate voting records, and had a good point that he was the only EVP candidate that studied abroad (shielding himself from the lack of successful action on the part of the SA this year, according to many).

His closing statement, however, was a fairly weak call to "work together."

Grades:

Opening Statement: C

Closing Statement: C

Style: A-

Substance: A-

Final Grade: B+

---
Josh Goldstein - Goldstein made his opening statement a reiteration of his main campaign theme that 1 in 5 GW students don't graduate from GW.

Goldstein kept on pushing his '1 out of 5' theme throughout the debate. The way I see it, the only possible outcome of this theme it is to drive potential voters away from his campaign. He didn't have an answer when asked about non-graduation rates at comparable universities to GW.  The problem with his theme is that it simply isn't that strong or convincing. As I see it, if Goldstein continues to push this theme he has a very little chance of winning. Is it going to really resonate with potential voters?

EDIT: Looking back at last year's SA election, the same thing was said about Julie Bindelglass' 'take back the SA' slogan/theme, which probably failed to resonate with voters, but still didn't prevent her from making it to the run-off.  If Goldstein's '1 in 5' theme doesn't convince voters, he still has a very real chance of getting into a run-off and winning himself.

Outside of the 1 in 5 debacle, Goldstein had a solid debate. He was articulate, and answered most of the questions with confidence. He got feisty when he accused Dobson of making the (in)famous Logan Dobson for SA EVP video. He would have been more effective had he sparred with Logan more, it was probably his best moment in the debate.

His closing statement started off with "every issue we have discussed tonight is a 1 in 5 issue."

Grades:

Opening Statement: D-

Closing Statement: D-

Style: B+

Substance: C+

Final Grade: C+

---

Jon Binetti - Josh has been a quiet SA Senator, and not surprisingly, he was quiet and reserved in the debate. He never felt comfortable when speaking, and seemed very much out of place compared to the other 3 candidates. His opening statement was okay, but too idealistic (SA straying away from primary goals, unfairness in student life, etc).

He faltered on the 'does the SA need to advocate more on behalf of the Greek system' question, a question that refers to his platform which suggests it does. His argument could not have been weaker. He should keep in mind that with four Greek candidates, he cannot expect to win with only splintered support from a few fraternities without getting votes from non-Greeks.

Overall his responses were too cautious, and his tone of voice was too tepid. His closing remarks, although vague, were slightly better than his opening.

Grades:

Opening Statement: C-

Closing Statement: C

Style: D

Substance: C

Final Grade: C-

---

We'll soon have complete audio of both the EVP and presidential debate online.

---