A JOKE GONE TOO FAR?
The Long-Johnson ticket may not exactly cater to individuals desiring serious UC leadership, but many undergraduates said they embrace the light-heartedness and quirky enthusiasm that the pair offers to this year’s election season.
“I think they have a lot of heart and passion,” said Matthew G. Yung ’13, as he passed by a campaign rally outside the Science Center. “In terms of substance—well, it’s the UC. [But] if you have heart, you have my respect.”
Luke L. Sperduto ’11, friend and supporter of the ticket, also lauded the campaign’s energy and comedic value.
“I like the sentiment,” Sperduto said, standing in front of an eight-foot long sign of the ticket’s name. “I think that the UC takes itself way too seriously.”
While the jokes may have amused many students, the blatant sexual innuendos have turned off some voters. A member of the Radcliffe Union of Students—a feminist group on campus—expressed her concerns over the RUS e-mail list regarding the campaign’s use of the phrase “Long-Johnson never takes no for an answer.”
The individual, who requested to remain unidentified to avoid controversey, had been offended by the phrase’s implications of sexual assault or sex without consent, according to RUS President Diane J. Choi ’10. Long promptly apologized on behalf of the ticket for any possible offense, stating that the slogan “wasn’t supposed to sound like it’s about rape.”
Choi said that RUS’ concern focused on that one statement and that the group was not offended by the campaign’s other suggestive slogans, including, “Change is hard...so hard” or “Long-Johnson: It’s in your hands!”
“With humor, you often walk a fine line between being offensive and being funny,” Choi said. “But when you know that something is not serious, you give it more leeway than if you know they are actually serious about what they are saying.”
SOME HINTS OF LEGITIMACY
Although many students on campus view the Long-Johnson pair as a “joke ticket,” the candidates said they were serious about their efforts and offered a firm critique of the UC’s efficacy.
On Tuesday, campaign manager Michael J. Pankratz ’11 released a statement criticizing a recent Crimson article stating that the ticket was “taking the race less seriously.” Though Pankratz—a Crimson editor—recognized the “unorthodox” strategies of the campaign, he defended them as integral to distinguishing Long-Johnson from the other tickets.
Pankratz said that the campaign decided not to participate in the presidential debates—which some feel would have increased the ticket’s credibility—as a deliberate effort to highlight the forum’s failure to stimulate original dialogue and to showcase differences amongst the tickets.
In interviews with The Crimson, the campaign’s staffers said that the UC needs to prioritize realistic goals—a recognition that serves as a key difference between Long-Johnson and the other campaigns. Campaign members said they view the election as an opportunity to change students’ perception of the UC on campus and thereby increase its popularity and effectiveness.
And presentation can make all the difference, it seems. On Friday afternoon, Long called Johnson to organize their campaign efforts outside the Science Center, and his order was quick.
“Do you want to come at two and rally the people?” Long asked. “Do you have your shirt? Good. Don’t spill anything on it.”