Last week, Central Student Government announced the election of Daniel Green and Izzy Baer to the offices of President and Vice President, respectively. To the astonishing 23.9 percent of students who had nothing better to do and decided to vote, their MVision platform kept true to campus virtues of sexual misconduct and circle-jerking around one another’s talents.
“I wanted to be working with Daniel because of how amazing he is,” Baer actually said of her running mate.
However, the election itself was wrought with controversy; Reggie Bee, the Campus Corgi and self-proclaimed wünderdog of politics, was disqualified on account of his species, despite placing fourth with over 1,000 votes. This affront on democracy shall not go unnoticed; but for now, an even greater controversy looms heavy over the University Election Commission.
Today, an unnamed whistleblower with inside information regarding the origins and backgrounds of each CSG candidate came forward with a startling revelation. In his research, he found that each CSG candidate and the respective political party they represent are incredibly similar to one another.
How can this be? How can multiple groups on campus all come to the same conclusions about how to solve the problems that plague the University community?
The answer lies right before our ignorant eyes: CSG candidates are so similar year-in and year-out that they might be the same person.
Don’t believe me? Well then, tell me this: why does each CSG political party seem like a carbon copy of itself? Can you tell me the difference in partisan ideology between MVision, MomentUM, and aMplify? Can you explain the differences in their platforms, backgrounds, and experiences?
Of course you can’t, because they’re all the same. Each party consists of the same monolithic collection of public policy majors, Atticus Finch understudies, and members of the almighty Greek Life community, unscathed by their recent lack of activity. They all disseminate their pompous sermons of how they, as your humble servants in government, will “knock-down barriers” and “promote inclusivity,” without ever giving specifics on how they might actually accomplish these feats.
Even their platform points are mirror images of one another. Nearly every party advocates for the same hodge-podge collection of policy items, including addressing food insecurity, funding new SAPAC initiatives, and hosting town halls across campus so students can willfully ignore whatever it is that CSG spends all its time on. There’s no other explanation for these nauseating similarities than the inalienable truth that every candidate is the same person.
If this is true, even Reggie Bee has deceived us all. And he’s just a dog! Or is he? Could he be the same person, just wearing an adorable dog costume? I see no reason to believe otherwise.
Do you still find yourself caught in disbelief? Are you finding it difficult to accept the obvious truth that CSG has corrupted our very notions of democracy by peddling the same candidate for years on end? Maybe some photographic evidence will help. Look at MVision’s campaign website, where they feature each of their unique and independent “staffers.” Look at their identical fake smiles, their professional yet approachable demeanor, their casually unbuttoned yet undoubtedly expensive attire. Can you seriously tell me that each of their bright and shining faces are not just the same person dressed up in slightly different attire?