Letters to the editor: Western Michigan Unviersity students react to WSA election
WMU should make their voices heard
I am writing as the former WSA president, a member of the WSA for two years, and an active student.
This letter is not in support of either candidates, but addressing the complaints of the WSA.
Due to the outcome of the recent election, hundreds of students feel as though their voice was not heard. This does not mean the WSA no longer stands for the students or represents the student voice. This means that it was left to 37 students to make a decision that should be left to the greater population.
This was the procedure lined out in our constitution, the constitution just approved by the student body. In the heated discussion, students, including myself, went with their emotion, rather than separating that with what the student body called for.
I am not disappointed in the students who voted on Wednesday, or blame them for anything. I also don’t think the right thing to do is boycott or slander the WSA. This organization has made tremendous strides the past two years, with much improvement still expected.
Now, it is the duty of the student body, to make sure your voice IS heard. Come to the WSA and tell us how you feel. In the next election, come out and vote in overwhelming numbers so the possibility of it ending in the senate hands, never happens. Take this outcome, and learn from our mistakes.
Both candidates ran a wonderful and exhausting campaign. I cannot imagine how either slate feels, but it is important as we move on, that we support the WSA by telling us when we make mistakes, and then taking action to insure that it never happens again.
If you feel as though your voice wasn’t heard, I hope it enrages you and you come to the WSA and never let your voice be silenced again. This is no longer about the candidates, and was never anything personal, but is about the principle of the democratic vote.
I wish all candidates the best in the future years to come. I know this isn’t over yet, but I hope the student faith in the WSA can be restored.
— Danielle Harik
WSA president emerita
It’s up to you to get involved
It has come to my attention that the outcome of this most recent campus presidential election has caused uproar on campus and on the Western Herald Web site. My question is: Why?
Many of the students claim that the Western Student Association has unfairly and unjustly put in Nordstrand as president despite Knappen taking more votes in the election.
But how is this unfair? Around 1,200 people voted on an election that’s outcome affects the almost 25,000students that attend this college. When no one got majority vote, it went to the WSA. The WSA had only 36 members in attendance that day.
Those 36 students decided the president. If anyone has a problem with the low amount of students choosing a president (whom they believe is in the best interest of the whole campus) the only problem is then with themselves.
Every single RSO on campus is allowed one senator to attend WSA meetings and there are well over 200 at WMU. On top of that, each college allows a number of students to join WSA as senators and many of the positions are unfilled. Our WSA could have easily been filled with over 200 students and made sure that each student would have had their voice heard. When the presidential election came down to the wire and it went to the WSA for the final vote, everyone who wanted to be in WSA was there. If you have any disagreements that WSA isn’t really “Where your voice is heard” then it’s up to you to get involved, not the members of WSA’s fault.
—Dustin Brondyke
WMU sophomore
Nordstrand/Dunsmore ‑ Knappen/Putnam ‑ Both Winners
As a fifth‑year senior involved with numerous on‑campus activities and RSO’s, I’ve become acquainted with numerous leaders and prosperous students on campus. Over the past year, I’ve not only had the chance to meet Stacey Nordstrand, Courtney Dunsmore, Nate Knappen, and Janine Putnam, but have built everlasting friendships with the four of them. As an orientation leader, I grew to love Nate, Janine, and Stacy alike for their different styles of leadership and affectionate prowess that each of them brought to the position.
When the news came that Stacey would be running against Nate for WSA presidency, I was torn. Not because they are friends of mine, but because both are extremely dedicated to the university and are well qualified for any leadership position on campus. As election time grew nearer, the mutual friendships that had been created over the summer started to deteriorate, with many people choosing sides and bashing the other. I witnessed true leaders on this campus verbally assaulting one another, taking sides to the extreme without reason or questioning.
As the results came in late Wednesday, I realized one thing: the true winners of this election are the students. Stacey Nordstrand and Courtney Dunsmore will do an outstanding job as WSA president and vice president. Had Knappen and Putnam won, they would have done an equally amazing job. Every candidate in this election has already made an impact on this campus, and will continue to do so.
I am proud of Nordstand and Dunsmore, but am equally proud of Knappen and Putnam. For those bashing these proven leaders, maybe it’s time to step up and try to make a change on campus like these students have. Your words can only carry so much meaning without any real action behind them.
—Kellen Story
WMU senior
WSA should review their decision
The students of WMU clearly do not want Stacy Nordstrand to be WSA president. She only got 32 percent of the vote. Her opponent got 50 percent. In fact, we had two separate elections and Nate Knappen got more votes both times.
The WSA claims to represent the students of Western, but apparently they think they know better than us. When they chose to ignore the results of two elections they slapped the face of every student who voted. The WSA has no legitimacy as a student organization anymore. What they did was WRONG.
The WSA can make all the claims they want about technicalities in the rules for elections. They can claim that technically they obeyed all the rules. But we all know that when one ticket gets 50 percent of the vote and the other gets only 32 percent of the vote, they should have chosen the ticket the students actually wanted.
We all know what really happened. The WSA was mad at Nate. For whatever reason they personally liked Stacy better. They let their emotions get in the way of doing their job. As a result of that, they decided to tell our entire student population that the WSA doesn’t care what we think.
It’s not too late for someone to do the right thing. Stacy should bow out honorably instead of forcing herself on us, after she got less votes than Nate in two elections in a row. The WSA should review their decision and change their mind.
Even if they can say that on a technicality they were allowed to overturn the students’ decision, they all know that they shouldn’t have. I urge WSA and Stacy to overturn this travesty of justice.
—William Menta
WMU student
Election stolen amidst poor decisions
The headline on the April 16 edition of the Western Herald, “Nordstrand named WSA president,” is correct. She was “named” president by the WSA itself. This final decision has been the poorest of all the poor decisions relating to this entire election.
To those in the WSA who voted to appoint Nordstrand/Dunsmore, you have made a poor decision in throwing out the voice of the people twice and appointing someone clearly not wanted by the student body, that group that you represent. Remember that you work for the students and you are where you are to solely represent students. You are not there to express your own opinions!
To Stacey Nordstrand and Courtney Dunsmore, you have made a poor decision in endorsing this appointment process and not rejecting the results. You have been defeated on two occasions, the second time having even less of a percentage of the vote. The students, whom you are now about to serve as representative heads, clearly did not specify that they were in favor of electing you. You have stolen an election.
To the WSA, you have made a poor decision in throwing democracy out the window. Your continued efforts to reach out to the student body and let them know that you’re here have now been completely wiped out. You have lost all credibility and you are no longer a “student” association; you are now an association dedicated to the opinions of your members and thus you no longer represent the students.
The WSA is no longer a student organization and I would encourage students to seriously question the motivation behind the WSA. The WSA has now been shown to be corrupt and is no longer the voice of the students.
—Aaron Glenn Miller
WMU junior
WSA results are a serious problem
Upon hearing the disappointed results of the recent WSA election I am greatly concerned about the process leading to the final result. As a democratic body it is a sensitive process by which things can operate here at Western. Many have been justifiable hurt by this outcome which bares some consideration. I am sure most students outside of the ones who voted (under 5 percent of the student body) are sadly not worried about this, but this should not deter the proper changes that must be made here. Knappen/Putnam won twice based on the students’ vote, and I can’t help thinking that Dunsmore/Nordtrand would feel ashamed to know they are representing a body who did not vote for them. Our national democratic system pacified the tens of millions who voted against Obama in the world’s smoothest transitions of power because the popular decision ultimately sided with President Obama. So democratically there is a serious issue with this election, one that Western needs to deal with effectively; of course I propose Knappen/Putnam be reinstalled to their popularly elected positions and the existing and applicable avenues for appeal must be explored. I would like to think Western would take some pride in working to have a president elected by those diligent enough to see it work through a fair election.
—Devon Beck,
WMU graduate student
Short URL: http://www.westernherald.com/?p=5849
Cody Kimball Web Manager: I'm a Communication Student at WMU, a SCUBA Diver, Boater, Ordained Minister, Notary Public, Web Designer, Film Maker, DJ, and of course a Journalist. Born and raised in Port Huron, MI and a graduate of SC4. http://www.codykimball.com



As many people have stated, if you are upset and mad, than do something about it. Actions speak louder than words. Become more involved in the WSA and campus organizations. Even though this publicity has been negative, it HAS brought more attention to the WSA. Hopefully the members will use this and turn it into a positive. Nate and Janine brought new attention to the WSA. They brought in votes and increased awareness to students who previously did not know much about the organization. I think they should be congratulated and proud of that. A leader is someone that can relate to it’s members. I know that many of the students voted for Nate and Janine because they could relate most with them. They respected their character and skills, and felt that they would be the best representation of the students. Unfortunately many others chose to vote by emotion. I know many were put in a hard situation, being friends with both sides. But I would hope that Stacy and Courtney would be mature enough to know that their vote to Nate would be because they represented the students opinions. But they chose friendship over democracy. Don’t forget approx. 800 students voted against Stacy/Courtney in the second election, only 392 wanted her in that position. Also in the first election, there were roughly 2000 votes, so why was there 800 less for the second? I think part of the problem was the lack of advertisement by the ECB of the second election. You can not fully blame the students for not voting. If they are not aware of an election, how can they vote? I think that the ECB and the WSA needs to do more to increase awareness of elections. It should not be solely up to the candidates to promote them.
Hey Aaron and Willie,
Nate and Janine didn’t win twice. They won zero times. Once they cheated (which somehow people who support them seem to forget). The second time they didn’t get the required amount to win. The senate, who maybe didn’t forget the cheating, voted in the person who they thought fit for the job. Nate and Janine cheated once and lost once, then lost again in the senate. Just because the numbers are greater doesn’t mean you win, especially when you break 7 different rules getting those numbers.
The thing I don’t trust are Nate’s numbers. Are WMU students so stupid they would still elect a ticket that cheated? I wonder if there was more cheating on Nate’s part that we just haven’t heard about yet. Sadly, you all seem to feel so bad for the cheater to realize maybe you should see if he continued his string of cheating. Its just a suggestion.
Hey stranger who arrogantly named themselves “Someone who comprehends”: read my comments before you attack me.
I very clearly said “Nate got more votes both times” …which is completely true.
yeeesh, if you’re so eager to attack me, at least read what I wrote. And at least have the courage to attach your real name to the comment.
The whole point of my letter was that when one candidate gets only 32 % and the other gets 50%, the voters clearly wanted the 2nd candidate more than the other. You can call the students of WMU “Stupid” for wanting Nate more than Stacy. But you are only proving my point that the people who anointed Stacy seem to think they know better than the voters.