Overall, both candidates did very well and came off as polished, confident, and potentially good advocates. Xochitl may be the overwhelming underdog in this race, but she more than held her own.
Jason Lifton - Lifton gave a laundry list of his extra-curriculars, and talked about the necessity of communication in an SA presidential administration, a point he hammered throughout the debate. It was a decent opening.
Jason was assisted with an infomail sent out the day of the debate announcing the doubling of the number of CCAS advisors, a huge victory on his part, and a point he effectively used during the debate.
He handled every question very well, and came off as highly informed and deeply connected, although at times he sounded a little pretentious in comparison to his opponent.
He surprisingly criticized Julie Bindelglass for her failure to effectively communicate her agenda, and he called cabinet meetings "ineffective" when asked why Bindelglass has held only 3 all year.
Lifton also took a shot at Xochitl's lack of experience, which she sharply countered.
His closing statement was a summary of his advocacy as EVP, which was helpful.
Overall, Lifton had a very, very strong performance. It's hard to pinpoint any missteps since the message he was trying to drive home (communication, advocacy, experience) were consistently present in each of his answers throughout the debate.
Grades:
Opening Statement: B
Closing Statement: B
Style: A-
Substance: A-
Final Grade: A-
---
Xochitl Sanchez - With absolutely no idea of what to expect, Xochitl's performance can be considered a resounding success.
Her opening statement framed her candidacy as an SA outsider tired of the SA. Nothing too ground-breaking, and it was a little predictable.
Xochitl came across as down to earth, articulate, and informed on many of the issues that were discussed. She probably did enough to quell the concerns of some students who thought she had no connections with the GW administration or wouldn't be a good voice for the student body. She came off as highly likable and seemed like the "average student" rather than a member of the SA. I'm sure that was her intention, and she succeeded.
Xochitl also very wisely called herself a tool at one point in an effort to be seen as a credible candidate. She cited her personal relationships with GW administrators, and her experience with student organizations to build up the legitimacy of her experience and knowledge.
Her only true weak point came when defending the vagueness in her platform, which she answered with even more vagueness, responding that it represented "the needs and wants of students and student organizations."
Sanchez's closing statement was a reiteration of her outsider status, and saying she wanted to leave a legacy at GW.
Grades:
Opening Statement: B
Closing Statement: B+
Style: A
Substance: B
Final Grade: B+
---
No comments:
Post a Comment