What’s with Narayan?

**Please note, the following post should NOT serve as an endorsement of any kind. Thank you. -Carrie

For those of us who walked around the Massell Quad on Tuesday, it was hard to miss the words written on the walkways with masking tape – “Vote Narayan.” A creative use of Union materials, no doubt, that could arguably be the reason he pulled up one extra vote¬†over Savannah Pearlman which led him into the final round against Nipun Marwaha.

Narayan is a curious creature among the Massell Quad candidates as his fliers and facebook group do not dictate a platform. In fact, when speaking with him last night, he was open in admitting that he had no platform to his candidacy. While I would imagine this fact may deter others from voting for him, I find this stance to be oddly refreshing and a welcomed change of pace. Granted, specified platforms are the only items that stand in the way of turning Student Union elections into popularity contests. Still I cannot resist a qwirky, irrelevent poster which brings a sense of playfulness to the baseless tension and drama that these elections cause.

Once the other three candidates expressed their campaign promises, I found myself objecting to something in each of their platforms. However, Narayan made no promises; he simply introduced himself as a member of the Brandeis community. I would rather have a senator who would support endowment transparency – someone who would help to ensure that the entire campus is notified when a police officer draws his gun. I am not looking for a senator who wants to “increase Sherman hours” and “fix the Renfield dryers” (which, the dryers are funcioning perfectly, by the way…).

So, thank you, Narayan, for not handing out the same, old, washed-up campaign promises that will likely never be kept. Thank you for leaving the Renfield dryers alone. Thank you for not taking this process too seriously.


5 thoughts on “What’s with Narayan?”

  1. Just saw this article, and I’d like to throw in my two cents. Carrie, you may have not loved our platforms, but they were tailored off the Massell Quad’s personal requests, so I think your being harsh on the “other 3 candidates”. Not to mention a lot of the ways you accused us of running our campaigns I don’t remember me, Narayan, Nipun, or Savannah doing. Very surprised this was thrown up during elections, and I wonder what it’s purpose was aside from being offensive to all 4 of us.

  2. My feelings tend to be that people(voters) need to know what they are voting for. I myself know Narayan personally as we are in the same USEM. I think he is a nice guy but I have not seen anything on his signs or speeches telling me about his qualifications. This platform secrecy almost gives a questioning feeling to whether one should vote or not.

    Granted I’ll admit I am his opponent and you are going to assume bias on my part; however, there is nothing for me to bias.

    I am just glad that I got to run against 3 strong members of Massell Quad.

    I ask everyone in Massell to vote for who you feel is qualified to do the job.

  3. Most important quality needed? Willingness to do work.

    A Senator can promise all they want, but it won’t matter if they aren’t willing to work.

  4. I believe you’ve missed the point of this article, Adam.

    I am not suggesting in the least that every candidate run without a written platform. Oh, heavens no! Instead, I’m commenting on the fact that someone does in fact care, but isn’t going around with a long list of things that could not ALL be accomplished. I said that I found his technique to be “oddly refreshing and a welcomed change of pace.” I did not even suggest that this should be the future tone of elections.

    You seem to define my “way of thinking” as running without a platform – and Adam, you know that’s not how I think. Don’ go into a rather long tizzy with that misconception. You know a humorous approach is not what I’m on the hunt for in a candidate. If there’s any doubt about that, refer yourself to the third paragraph of my original post.

    My underlying point is that people take this all too seriously – yourself included – and it is, in fact, oddly refreshing to have a candidate who does not make this the end-all-be-all of their life, as some people seem to do.

  5. Carrie, I couldn’t disagree more. Obviously nobody should take these elections more seriously than they should be, but it is a mistake to think they mean nothing and that the Student Union is something that you should fake your way into. I don’t expect that candidates for a freshman quad senate seat would have enough knowledge of the Union to determine exactly what is and is not within the scope of the Union Senate, but I do expect them to show an ear for the concerns of their constituency.

    I have met both Narayan and Nipun, and I think that either of them would make a very strong Massell Quad Senator. I also think it is inaccurate to say that Narayan has no issues that he’s running on; while he may lack a formally stated platform, I know that there are certain issues he’s interested in working on. That being said, I understand why the Massell Quad constituency would judge Nipun more favorably for being explicit about his plans in the Senate, and I would encourage Narayan to do the same.

    You acknowledge yourself that your way of thinking merely degenerates Union elections into a popularity contest. No one running solely on “I’m a nice guy” deserves to win. If you want nothing more than humorous meta-commentary on the Union from your candidates, then feel free to write in Frank the Tank; however, I think you’ll find the vast majority of the Brandeis community disagrees.

Comments are closed.