Some of you may be aware that ASSU is conducting their annual census of the democratically inclined members of the Stanford student body. Per their constitution, communists will only receive 3/5 of a vote. As you may also know, there are about 17,000 different slates and senators running, and each running on what they perceive to be the “real” issues that effect Stanford students daily.

This, of course, is a farce. If they were focusing on “real” issues, there would be at least one platform campaigning to fight the plague of laundry room criminals who leave their precious garments unattended after the washer has finished, filling at least 70 percent of machines across campus any given Sunday afternoon. These really in-touch campaigners would suggest that we ankle-bracelet the chronic perpetrators and/or waterboard them in the Wellness Room.

They, I suppose, would run a vigorous campaign (flyers! Facebook groups! e-mails from people you are trying to forget!), opposing in a lively multimedia debate the SAOSDS (SOW-suds), Students Against Other Students who Don’t Shower. The riveting leader of this coalition would recount tear-jerking stories of his experiences stuck in a Chem 35 lecture surrounded by hygienically challenged peers. The proponents would suggest that we ankle-bracelet the chronic perpetrators and/or waterboard them in the Wellness Room.

I would have to be willfully unaware of this year’s platforms to not mention that many have made specific outlines of the policies they hope to initiate. Nonetheless, within and beyond Stanford, general abstract commitments, bordering on platitudes, to sustainability, transparency, et al., are more the stuff of a good campaign. The first obvious explanation for this is that unquantifiable promises are easier to defend than specific plans. Here, I must tip my hat to the esteemed Samantha Bee, a correspondent on “The Daily Show.” Explaining the fallout after one of President Obama’s campaign promises fell through, Bee points out how he erred. He could very well have made emphatic promises, she says, just not specific promises. As an example, clips interposed in her discussion juxtapose one term, “Read My Lips: No New Taxes” Bush with two term, “Give me the opportunity to lead this nation and I will lead” Bush (punch line: he never said in which direction). But, I would like to take a slightly different view of how these platforms coalesce, because I don’t think this is the whole story.

To be fair, there are only a limited number of shared concerns among Stanford students–naturally, these are not going to be terribly specific to any given individual or group. Moreover, there seems to be a general rule that the degree of specificity to campaign promises is directly proportional to the obviousness of unflattering, negative consequences. For example, it is not entirely obvious what the drawbacks are–indeed, it almost seems foolish to suggest they exist–for a commitment to sustainability. But, suppose the concrete manifestation of that commitment is using more recycled paper products with a higher price point than the old-fashioned sort made from the corpses of a virgin forest. There is an argument here–that is, it may or may not be worth it to increase student fees or taxes–that only emerges when we draw out the particulars of the commitment.

In student campaigns here, there is such a high degree of turnover that it makes little sense to engender debate during the campaign rather than promote lofty intangibles. Candidates can stave off debate by presenting only the positive ideals; refraining from outlining the specifics is a way to disguise the fact that nearly any policy decision will have drawbacks. After all, very few candidates will be taken to task for not acting on their promises. To that end, I must confess that I admire those candidates who dare to take the controversial stance. Naturally, with the danger of staking a campaign claim firmly on earth comes the reward of material dividends when a campaigner becomes an effective policymaker.

Emily probably would be the first one ankle-braceleted. Track her at [email protected] .