Friday, February 23, 2007

Josh, Tommy, & All Your Turncoat Favorites!

Ah, the man that accused me of "slandering" Gator in a written essay, returns with one of the most socially-irresponsible/Sad-Turncoat columns to grace the Alligator in a long time. Members of the Indie Bastard Class of '07 seem to becoming slightly desperate in their ways as of late. With more and more Indie leaders supporting PANTS officially (e.g. Nikki Grant), tepidly (e.g. Ryan Nelson), like chicken-shits, fearing to burn social ties (e.g. can't say), or giving free & sketch campaign advice to the side they abandoned (e.g. can't say), the offering of the bastard class to their Greek/FBK masters may not pan out quite as accurately as they'd pereceived early on.

The Indie vote won't win an election. Let's put that baby to sleep already. However, the turncoats didn't go in offering the AA community or the IFC houses, they went in with an offer that albeit no one at Gator particularly cared about, they still made bold assurances even on this very site that the Battle for the Independent community was a non-factor.

This morning before heading over to school (the joys of a planning period to post), I sent several folks a question and an opportunity to comment on Josh Simmons' horrible letter to the Alligator. One of the first responses was Will Foster, whom simply replied with this:

"Heh and just over a month before the sell out wrote this"

This letter was written by a genuine GDI -- or was it? Those of you that remain in denial in regards to my theories tell me, explain, enlighten did this GDI go from writing a letter for students to vote, to writing a second letter encouraging students to not vote? TURNCOAT! TRAITOR! TURNCOAT!

From Charlie Grapski:


I cannot comment on this individual - as I have no idea who he is. And I have not followed the particulars enough to know.

However I have seen this kind of sentiment before. And I believe it reflects an extremely naive as well as irresponsible sentiment.

It often reflects one of two things, however:

1) This is often the sentiment expressed by those who have been thoroughly defeated - they have given up the struggle. This is unfortunate. But it is understandable. When facing this kind of entrenched power - and when the "law" that is supposed to prevent their abuses is silent - it is not easy to continue the struggle. But that is what they rely on. Because it is not a particular victory that is important in such a struggle - to fight an entrenched power, when you are but individuals without such authority, requires a war of attrition strategy. No single battle will determine the eventual outcome. No single victory will solve the problem. Nor will a single defeat be a disaster. The key is to keep up the struggle. Many, however, will give up - and when they do - this is one of the most common reactions.

2) I have also often seen this come from those who were only in the
struggle for their own self-interest. They first try to join "the system" - but are shut out. Then they stand up against it - and in such cases they blend in with those who are struggle against it for principle (not self-interest). When they gain some power in the opposition in this way - they are often approached by the system to work cooperatively with them. They often do - and effectively become co-opted by the system. But they are never really taken in to that system. So if their self-interest is their motivating factor, they tend to then react back again. This time they don't come back and fight - they give up the fight. But they cannot do so simply - so they discourage others from joining in the struggle. If they can't win, no one can. But then again - their goal was never the same goal as those fighting for the principle. Thus this is not inconsistent behavior - from the perspective of their aims and objectives.

Like I said - I cannot judge this individual or their motives - as I have no idea of the facts of the situation or the person.

But my experience suggests the likely explanation for this kind of
column - which if you review the history of SG elections you will find is nearly identical to others over time - is one of the two above. Which one - that is up to those who know the facts and the individual to decide.


From Gavin Baker
***J.S. Alligator quote(s)
Gavin Baker

***"The Gator Party has been nothing but forthright, friendly and considerate - at least as much as an SG political party can be."

***"Pants, on the other hand, has run the dirtiest campaign in recent memory."

I haven't heard that much about Gator's tactics (other than the ratherunsubstantiated rumors about candidate intimidation). But Pants clearly does not fit the description he labels it with. It's been a bit negative, but -- the dirtiest in recent memory? Where was the author last year when a Unite partisan wrote that John Boyles had sold his soul? Mr. Simmons worked on that campaign, and I would argue it was alot worse than Pants has been. And I guarantee that Unite is not the low mark "in recent memory". So basically, this is bullshit.

***""The outcome of this election has been assured for a while, and despite whatever the blue- or brown-clad campaigners tell you, your solitary, worthless vote is not going to make one iota of difference. On Tuesday and Wednesday of next week, I encourage you to flaunt with pride your indifference, your apathy and your deliberate lack of an "I Voted" sticker."

It's pretty fucking lame that, rather than focusing on all the reasons TO vote, he would rather encourage voter apathy and perpetuate the disengagements of the students from their Student Government. Pretty fucking lame.

From Amanda Kane


My opinion on the matter (for publication or not, your choice):

Josh is one of the most intelligent, hardworking people I met at UF; regardless of personal differences people may have with him now, I don't think that opinion will ever change. He also has the snarkiest and most cynical sense of humor on campus. I think anyone who selflessly worked on three campaigns (either side) has the absolute right to get up and say whatever he thinks in a public forum without being called names, much though I may disagree with idea and underlying sentiment of his column.

I also think it is quite important to remember that many of the people you criticize are 18, 19, 20 years old. I'm sure at 19 I was a barely formed human being (probably not even capable of tying my own shoes). Yet these kids have had to develop in an environment that I can only describe as toxic. I'm not sure what I would say about SG and voting if my first three semesters at UF were spent in such a state.

Thanks again for keeping me updated and all the best,



Anonymous said...

You're surprised that Josh Simmons is with the turncoats? His best friends are Ben and Kim.

But Grapski has my respect for not passing judgement on people he doesn't know. You could learn from him.

Anonymous said...

Tommy knows Josh

Sam Miorelli said...

So my first blog comment EVER!

I'm the one responsible for Tommy being in our video and am happy he taped it. I have always known Tommy to be a principled person and while I disagree with him on even mildly supporting Gator, he still has my respect. I can't say the same thing about a bunch of the other turncoats, however.

I hope y'all enjoy watching the entire video (available through the link given by anon 3:07) as much as I did producing it!

Look out for more videos in the next 48 hours...

will said...

Jardon didn't sell out dammit.

Anonymous said...

Maybe your first blog comment (and I doubt that) but certainly not the first thing on a blog you've authored Atilla!

Anonymous said...

To Gavin: While Unite may have had some negative moments - I would contend that Pants as a whole has a more generally negative perspective and campaign tactics.

Let's start with something as simple as t-shirts: "SG sucks" and a gator actually giving the finger to everyone standing in front of Pants t-shirt wearer.

Now we should move on to debates: While I think Bruce did a very good job staying semi-positive, Eve and to an even larger degree Elizabeth seemed to go off the deep end with vitriolic, offensive, and often untrue criticisms; often they would even abandon the question to make attacks on The Gator Party. Not to mention, Eve in closing remarks at the ASU debate actually attacked The Gator Party. I don't know how much debate you've been involved in, but that's just classless.

The Election Violations: After this coming Monday there will be only one party not guilty of election complaints.

Talking to Students: I actually listened to a Pants party supporter rail (for upwards of 30 minutes) to someone wearing a Gator sticker about the Greek dominance of elections and the (direct quote) "evil system."

The videos: Relentless and often baseless classless attacks on the Gator party and their supporters. Going as far as to say that fraternity members who do not collect the proper number of "I voted" stickers will actually fall victim to physical violence.

False Allegations: The Pants party and its members have made wide obscene statements about members of the Gator party and illegal activity with no regard to the truth of their accusations. They have not been able to substantiate any claim with ONE piece of evidence. NOT ONE.

So in the end Pants has been obscene, classless, and downright dirty in their campaign tactics. To claim Unite was worse would mean there was a lot going on in the back rooms of Unite that the average student never saw... as Pants has been very negative in very public forums.

Howard Roark said...

"I don't know how much debate you've been involved in, but that's just classless."

Liz is an award winning debater, i'd place you on the level of a master debater.

"Elizabeth seemed to go off the deep end with vitriolic, offensive, and often untrue criticisms;"

List'em bitches. It isn't our fault EJ told the Sun that cameras would help sustainability then brought up the issue at the debate.

"I actually listened to a Pants party supporter rail (for upwards of 30 minutes) to someone wearing a Gator sticker about the Greek dominance of elections and the (direct quote) "evil system." "

Hahahaha. Nothing new. It happened with impact, unite, and action.

"The Pants party and its members have made wide obscene statements about members of the Gator party and illegal activity with no regard to the truth of their accusations. "


"The Election Violations: After this coming Monday there will be only one party not guilty of election complaints."

Suck it Josh, Ryan day's claims won't have any major action taken against pants.

So in short. Suck it Josh. I hear you do it anyway, albeit, poorly.

Anonymous said...

Trust me, with him, oral contact better than his vaginal contact.

Anonymous said...


SAT's don't make an IQ

It is a combination of IQ and something else, like EQ

I bet if josh honestly took an EQ test he would score as emotionally retarded.


Christian Duque said...

Received word for another PANTS member and Tommy may not have made the "incendiary" comments I was told he made. Very fishy...

Also, I corrected that Tommy was drunk, though there is no question by any source that he had been drinking. Whether Tommy was so drunk that his mode of transportation to and from the studio was via wheelbarrow or whether he had just had a couple is still unknown.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the problems with the Pants' side of the debates lays mostly with Eve. She ran her cabinet poorly and left the next director with nothing. Honestly, the binder was empty. Yet she decided to call out cabinet's failings at a cabinet event. Either she is not completely there or was lying.

ego said...

I've worked on many a campaign here at UF. Whoever thinks Pants is running the "dirtiest campaign in recent memory" is clearly a little wet behind the ears. I'd say Pants is running the 2nd most honest campaign in recent history, and people who have earned at UF over 60 credits should know what the 1st most honest campaign was.

Anonymous said...

All of this discussion of turncoats has been rather interesting... If we are going to discuss it, perhaps we should talk about some other rather prominent turncoats. Everyone remember Ryan Nelson last year? Traitor and turncoat one week before the election, yet now he is praised. Diane Kassim, traitor and turncoat the last day of slating in Dennis' election. Why is it that this turncoat philosophy is applied only when people are traitors to causes you all don't like, yet it is ok when they are traitos for your benefit? Make one standard and stick to it. And to all of you turncoats out there, be honest and upfront in the future, if you choose a side do not change in the middle of an election, especially when you have been on the inside of a party like Ryan and Diane.

Anonymous said...

Who is Tommy and why is he in that video? Someone explain this to me.

Anonymous said...

Ego, you are Andrew Hoffman and I claim my five pounds.

ym said...

How can you be out of SG when you continue to blog, meet with, and generally cause pain to the people involved. You are an alumni. That means your job is giving money.

Put your money where your mouth is and financially support these candidates.

Christian Duque said...

My job is more that of a hands-on historian. I try to give advice when asked and having lunch with candidate is hardly holding regular meetings.

My mind is on twenty different things and SG is not near the top of my list. I try to offer sound judgments and insights. The Turncoats & the Battle for the GDI -- both true, all arguments over, and what? Weren't you all saying I was delusional just a week ago?

Now Tommy Jardon wears a PANTS Party t-shirt, Indies that were supposedly "all with Gator" speak against that party, and when my blog was at best a joke blog (not even covered by the Alligator on its special on the sites) -- today it's the sole-survivor and going strong at 30,000+ hits.

When I get my contract, I'll donate money. Till then between supplements and savings, I'm not playing with my money much. I had wanted to donate to PANTS but really what's $100 gonna do? One day I'll surprise a GDi party with a donation befitting an alumni, till then all I have to offer is my Radikalness.

ym said...


No offense but the original "bloggers" such as Swamp Pundette, Reitz Rambler, UFGDI, and Gatorman have all graduated or left gainesville. As such they have moved on. That's why they stop doing this stuff. Let us compare apples to apples Christian. They didn't keep the idea going that they were somone that they weren't.

I will not speak for everyone on this site as I have no affiliations to them, but only speak to ensure that truth is heard and point out the falls in your logic. Going back to my original question from several weeks ago: Are deals ok to be made in politics? If not, then why did you encourage the Non-FBK backed party to make the deal necessary to win(January 7th). If so, why call people turncoats, traitors, and shameful for making those same deals. All I want is for you to be consistent. Tell me which is the true response of the GDI/Indie.

March 1st is soon approaching I eagerly await your answer.

Anonymous said...

I find it discreetly hilarious that you can brag about 30,000 hits. In about a week of being up the political party website have probably accumulated something like 10k hits a piece.

Christian Duque said...

What can I say, TR is perhaps only a modestly successful site...

Anonymous said...

9:23 PM: I think it is hilarious Day won't post with his name.

Anonymous said...

says the guy posting anonymously

Gavin Baker said...

Christian, I think your self-description as a "hands-on historian" is the best way I've heard to describe your current involvement with SG.

Anonymous said...

To 12:13.

Ya, but i don't say things that give away that fact i am a chain-smoking Day.

Anonymous said...

Only when drinking!

~Ryan Day

Anonymous said...

"Are deals ok to be made in politics? If not, then why did you encourage the Non-FBK backed party to make the deal necessary to win(January 7th). If so, why call people turncoats, traitors, and shameful for making those same deals. All I want is for you to be consistent. Tell me which is the true response of the GDI/Indie."

Of course you have to make deals. Just look at Will Foster and Elizabeth Stinson... apparently that deals okay.

The fact of the matter is Duque is just against FBK. He hides it under the mask of being a GDI or Indie or something radikal and awesome. But in the end he's just anti-FBK.

The simple fact of the matter is the greek community is currently too spread out and involved in too many organizations at too many high levels for the non-greek party to win.

The only way non-FBKers stand a chance is to cause a schism in the houses by either running a very popular second greek candidate, or appealing to middle-houses want of things like ACCENT and SGP. The only way to do that is by making a deal and promising positions, wonder who will end up doing it.

Anonymous said...

You believe in that deal while discounting the Ryan Day deal? God. My side is almost as bad as Pants. Let's stick to the facts.

Fact: David made up complaints

Fact: Pants has run the most negative campaign in recent history.

Fact: Pants has an obscene logo.

Fact: Pants misrepresented themselves with

Fact: Pants lies in press releases.

Fact: Pants slanders independent students.

Fact: Pants exec ticket is not professional (see debates).

Fact: Pant's treasurer is unqualified for the position.

Myth: Some deal with Day.

Possible Myth: Some deal with Sintson. Maybe Meyrowitz is **that** stupid. He did try the same stunt this year that he did with Impact.

Lets not do what they are doing -- we are gator -- we are above that.

Anonymous said...

And who says it was Day posting that? It very well could have been chain-smoking Day's traitorous girlfriend. Those turncoats all look the same, to me.


Anonymous said...

Poorly placed commas suck almost as much as Kim so 8:57 needs to learn to type.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:22 -

You must seriously need a girlfriend in the worst way!

~Ryan Day

Anonymous said...


Poorly placed commas are better than ignoring necessary commas.

Again: Ta.

Anonymous said...

And, actually, we both should've hyphenated "poorly placed." If we're going to get all grammar happy, that is.

howard dean said...

"Do not use a hyphen following adverbs that end in -ly (quickly forgotten incident)."