Stupid or Insincere?

Are the instigators of the move, which has earned this College the worst possible type of publicity with the general public (at a time when we are preparing to appeal to them for money) stupid or insincere? It is apparent that they must be one or the other, as it was amply pointed out that an election at this time must necessarily have repercussions which can be forseen but which cannot be curbed.

If the prime movers in this are sincere then they must be very shortsighted and stupid. You have only to view the results for yourselves.

If they are not stupid then it follows that they must be insincere for the same reason as above.

In granting sincerity we must also assume stupidity, and it is up to you to judge whether such people are your fit representatives on the Exec. of the Association.

If, however, they are not stupid, then this is not the main issue at stake and their assertions at the meeting, and since in print, that it is, prove them insincere, which is unforgiveable. We must then look for the real reason for this colossal upset. If personal pettiness, then a deplorable lack of a responsible attitude to the position which they hold is indicated. The rumours, completely unfounded, which are emanating (I am assured of this) from these people seem to indicate that this is the case. Some of these rumours, for whom sources are quoted, are extremely libellous and completely unworthy of consideration; the rest simply ridiculous. There appears to be one other possibility as a reason and that is that a group is attempting to play power politics and it does not seem necessary to comment on that.

The issue at stake is not whether the President's action was right or wrong—he has said himself that he realises that it was wrong—the point for your consideration is whether you want representatives who are capable of running student affairs without petty personal prejudices and consequent bickering, or not.