ASASUD postpones election results announcement

ASASUD presidential candidate Joseph Grossman (standing) is awaiting the release of Tuesday and Wednesday's election results after Andres Cano (left) and Diana Inzunza (center), both write-in presidential candidates, filed a joint complaint Thursday to the Election Committee concerning vote tabulation. ASASUD delayed announcing the election results after receiving the formal complaint, as well as an additional complaint from Cano and a third from another student. (Evie Carpenter/DD)

ASASUD election results have been postponed due to numerous complaints filed in the hour leading up to the originally set time of the announcement, ASASUD Director of Public Relations Beth Wischnia said.

Wischnia apologized for the inconvenience and said the Elections Committee plans to meet Thursday night and discuss the complaints ASASUD has received.

The results of the internal discussion will be announced no later than 5 p.m. Friday, according to ASASUD’s website. Wischnia said the election results will be announced as soon as possible but gave no definitive timeline for their release.

Three emails sent to the Elections Committee on Thursday were a major factor behind the Election Committee’s decision to postpone the announcement of the ASASUD election results, a source familiar with the proceedings confirmed.

One of the emails was written by both of the write-in executive campaigns, another was solely from presidential candidate and journalism sophomore Andres Cano and the last was from a student whose name the source would not divulge.

The first email, co-written by the executive tickets of Cano and running mate Brittany Morris as well as Diana Inzunza and running mate Rudy Rivas, was in reference to restrictions put on what write-in votes would be tabulated. The Elections Committee sent an email to the campaigns, which read that write-in votes would only be counted if both first names, both last names or both full names of an executive ticket were written, after voting had already began Tuesday morning.

The Election Committee’s email continued, saying, “Any combination of the three, however, will not be accepted.”

The email sent from the two write-in campaigns, which was confirmed by both tickets, read, in part, “We request that a voter’s intent be recorded and deemed valid in your tabulation, regardless of the text written-in.”

Since then and prior to counting votes, the Elections Committee broadened its ruling on which write-in votes would be tabulated, said Rheya Spigner, the committee chair.

The student’s email was similar to many others the Elections Committee received during the election in that the student complained about being unable to vote.

The source did not say why this particular email had a larger effect on the Elections Committee’s decision than emails sent by other students.

The source would also not confirm the contents of Cano’s email.

Inzunza, a nutrition freshman, and Rivas, a journalism junior, said they were approached by several students who couldn’t vote because of technical problems.

“Some people who put in the effort to vote weren’t even able to,” Rivas said.

Presidential candidate and criminal justice sophomore Joseph Grossman said he was “disappointed” in the election committee for not posting the results when they said they were going to.

“I waited all day for the results and now I’m sitting here hitting the refresh button every minute,” Grossman said. “It does seem unprofessional; I don’t know the situation behind this though.”

Contact the reporter at connor.radnovich@asu.edu

Clarification: April 7, 2011 – ASASUD postpones election results announcement

This story has been updated to reflect the announcement made on ASASUD’s website regarding the announcement of election results more accurately. The statement on ASASUD’s website says the results of the student government’s internal discussions will be announced on Friday, April 8, 2011, not necessarily election results themselves.

Comments

  1. It’s well-established law across the entire country that “voter intent” is paramount. Throwing out votes based on technicalities indicates a rigged election.