Michael Moll Accomplishes Goal in Presidential Debate

Michael Moll Now Considered Front Runner In Presidential Race

Despite the high stakes, Friday’s presidential debate was relatively uneventful. In many respects, the debate only confirmed what anyone following the race already knew. One pleasant surprise was the superior performance of Michael Moll. Moll, the least well known of the presidential candidates, proved himself on Friday, speaking confidently to a thoughtful platform and showing the most genuine interest in student well being.

The debate started slow. In his opening statement, Omar Chabaan called himself a “professional lobbyist”. Need I say more? He didn’t. Except to restate, almost mechanically, his vague calls for lower tuition, “better representation of student demographics” (I don’t think anyone, including Mr. Chabaan really knows that means), and of course, banning water bottles.

Chabaan is taken only half seriously by his opponents – there is consensus that the real race is between the two front runners, Jeremy McElroy and Michael Moll. This might explain why neither of them asked Chabaan the most obvious and illuminating question: for whom is a professional lobbyist?

The answer is: not us. Not UBC students. He lobbies for SPHR, a radical political organization that recently attempted to send seven hundred dollars to a foreign region through risky, unconventional, means. It doesn’t take much imagination to see what Chabaan would do with the power of the presidency.

McElroy’s performance was characteristically well informed and articulate. He failed, however, to assuage the major concern of his critics, who claim he’s a political hack, out of touch with real students. He lacked enthusiasm and appeared disconnected from matters of concern to normal students. Even those cheering his well rehearsed responses were almost entirely from the AMS’ inner clique.

In contrast to both Chabaan and McElroy, Michael Moll’s oft repeated core policy was clearly student centered. “I am here to represent students now… in the present.” A simple statement, but something not said by either of his opponents. Moll’s inexperience with the AMS, initially major a concern for his supporters, has become his greatest virtue. 

Moll’s greatest victory came in reference to McElroy’s touting of past AMS achievements. It is a “sad point if… the first time the public hears about it is at a debate”, he lamented.

At the end of the debate, the stage was briefly hijacked by a joke candidate from the Social Justice Center who did what SJC members do best: waste time (often hilariously). The only really interesting part of his attention-seeking performance was the drink he took from Chabaan’s water bottle. The blue bottle was identical to one used by Social Justice Center candidate Rory Breasail, leading some present to posit the existence of an unofficial “water bottle slate”.

Michael Moll had the most to gain or lose from the debate, and for him it was a decisive victory. He has established himself a serious candidate with students as a first priority. McElroy, long considered serious and formidable, must now prove that he has an understanding of student needs, to accompany his years of experience. Moll’s summation, in which he described his vision of the presidency, may prove the most memorable of the evening.  “The biggest thing I can do with this office” he urged, “is inspire people; I’m here to help.”