Dear Observer Editorial Board,
In response to your Feb. 7 editorial "Send a message, demand a choice," I must disagree with your use of The Observer asking students to abstain in the upcoming election. A half-page editorial demanding a choice directly below the pair of students brave enough to take on the challenge as voices of this University seems quite cold and callous, and I must question the motives of The Observer in this situation. The Editorial Board claims that when Student Government put forth Rocheleau and Rose, "the decision was made for the student body, not by the student body." To my eyes, this appears to be a political party selecting its two best candidates more than anything else. If the Editorial Board feels so strongly in having a choice, I suggest they should have found a pair of candidates they deemed suitable and put them forth in the election. The time for a fight is not now. The time to fight for additional candidates was when the first emails for information meetings went out. It was when the emails for another information meeting were sent. It was when petitions were being signed and applications were being submitted. Now, to write a half-page editorial demanding a choice, directly below the only two brave enough to run for a grueling job, seems to be both petty and unprofessional. And now, to answer the last question of your editorial, "But are they the best candidates?"
Yes. Unequivocally. They alone had the courage to stand up and run to represent the 12,000 students of this University. They alone have signed on to take the heat from many corners, including the burning words from a computer beneath South Dining Hall. For this reason, I will be opening my computer on Wednesday, and I will be clicking Rocheleau/Rose with conviction.
Kevin Wildey
sophomore
Duncan Hall
Feb. 7
