Quote:
Originally posted by emb021
I don't think so. But as I've never been a voting delegate, I may miss that just viewing from the peanut gallery.
There have been some upsets. Some people take the attitude that whoever is put forth by the nomination committee should be the candidates most likely to get voted in. Doesn't always happen. 
For many years its been almost standard that someone who become our National Vice President, serve for 2 terms, then run for National President, win, and serve 2 terms. We had a bit of an upset of this a convention or so back when a large group of voting delegates wanted another candidate, made sure said candidate would serve, then nominated from the floor and that person was elected president.
As I noted, a lot depends on the chapter voting delegates. If you aren't well liked by the students, you won't get far or get re-elected.
|
Thanks for the insight! One reason I'm interested in this across Greek lines b/c I have a thesis about all this: that how we choose our leaders says a lot about how we interact intra-organizationally, reflecting the "cultures" of the groups. I think that, how much we may decry it, we have systems that reflect how we interact. In my Fraternity, the "rough-and-tumble" approach is a part of the way we define brotherhood, more cumbersome and with problems but the comraderie and interaction is more important that efficiency.