Update: percentage values for the Sophomore Class election and DAC election have been updated. No final results were affected.


Below are the results for the 2012-2013 ASCMC Executive Board!

Bolded names indicate winners. Round 2 results indicate that Instant Run-Off voting was used.


ASCMC President

Gavin Landgraf: 54.17%

Nathan Falk: 45.83%

Write-In: 0.0%

Total Votes: 755


 ASCMC Vice President

Round 1

Maddie Hall: 48.11%

Adam Griffith: 30.68%

Demetrius Lalanne: 21.21%

Write-In: 0.0%

Round 2

Maddie Hall: 59.87%

Adam Griffith: 40.13%

Total Votes: 792


ASCMC Social Affairs Council Chair

Round 1

Mark Blumenfeld: 44.95%

Will Yandell: 26.09%

Rich Zajac: 18.85%

Warren Wood: 10.11%

Write-In: 0.0%

Round 2

Mark Blumenfeld: 50.69%

Will Yandell: 29.31%

Rich Zajac: 20.00%

Total Votes: 720


ASCMC Dorm Affairs Council Chair

Ben Tillotson: 84.40%

Manav Kohli (write-in): 14.94%

Other Write-In: 0.66%

Total Votes: 609


ASCMC Student Life Chair

Jessica Jin: 100%

Write-In: 0.0%

Total Votes: 657


Class of 2014 President

Laura Epstein: 51.65%

Bojana Bozic: 48.35%

Write-In: 0.0%

Total Votes: 242


Class of 2015 President

Round 1

Moe Abdul-Rahim: 35.5%

Logan Solomon: 34.1%

Kyra McAndrews: 30.3%


Round 2

Moe Abdul-Rahim: 53.2%

Logan Solomon: 46.8%

Write-In: 0.0%

Total Votes: 211


Class of 2016 President

Round 1

Iris Liu: 46.3%

Ben Turner: 23.7%

Richard Mancuso: 30.0%


Round 2

Iris Liu: 63.5%

Richard Mancuso: 36.5%

Write-In: 0.0%

Total Votes: 203



    • As SLC chair, Moe did so much with a small budget. He’s proven time & again that he really cares about the success of his events & his classmates. I was only on campus for half of his time as SLC chair, and I still went to more events than I have in previous years…I have a feeling this will be the best Monte Carlo I’ve seen in a while (keeping in mind I was abroad for Maddie’s, which I heard was incredible!) because Moe really listens to the input of other students. I agree with Ethan, try to be constructive and help. Ask Moe if you can help with the event planning, or provide valuable insights…please don’t just trash him anonymously on The Forum.

    • I know some had concerns about my ability to plan Monte Carlo. I guess I’ll just have to prove you wrong come next year.

  1. This is the best line-up I have ever seen in an ASCMC election and everyone ran such a great race. Couldn’t have asked for better results, though. It’s going to be one fantastic year for ASCMC and CMC in general. So much new energy. I am so optimistic for the future. Congrats to y’all!

  2. ASCMC do you know how to do math??

    Iris Liu: 46.3%
    Richard Mancuso: 53.7%
    Ben Turner: 23.6%

    100% != 123.6%

    • The result posted by the Elections Committee for Sophmore Class President did not provide a percentage breakdown for Round 1. Iris Liu received 94 votes in round 1. Ben Turner received 48. Richard Mancuso received 61. Richard correctly advanced to the second round, while Ben was eliminated. The Forum has been notified.

    • Yeah. Why does someone who has 53.7% of the vote need to be subjected to a run-off. Wtf does ASCMC not know that >50% is a majority?

  3. Mo sucks. Can’t even do his homework without complaining and whines all the time. Talks about how stressful his life is when he doesn’t do jack.

    • This comment is so uncalled for it really doesn’t deserve a response. However, I want Moe to know that anyone who actually knows him thinks he’s just about the nicest and most genuine person on campus.

      • Nobody’s saying he’s not a nice guy, but he has literally 0 organizational skills. Nice guy =! good president.

      • Not even one day on the job and he’s already fucking up. turned in his petition late because of “academic obligations”?! really? what the fuck was he doing? playing tetris?!!!!!!

  4. How could a third place candidate go into the second round?
    Are you kidding me??????
    What is wrong with ASCMC and the Forum? I am really disappointed in the Elections committee.

      • No, I get what Ben’s talking about. They just changed the election results and it’s:

        Class of 2016 President
        Round 1
        Iris Liu: 46.3%
        Richard Mancuso: 23.7%
        Ben Turner: 30.0%
        Round 2
        Iris Liu: 63.5%
        Richard Mancuso: 36.5%
        Write-In: 0.0%
        Total Votes: 203

        So I am asking you. How can a third place candidate go on to the next round?
        I think this deserves a comprehensive explanation.

        • This is still incorrect information. Iris received 94 votes (46.3%), Richard received 61 (30.0%), and Ben received 48 (23.7%). You can check the Hub for the official election results.

        • “This is still incorrect information”?
          I’m sorry for saying this but at the present time the article had not been updated. The Forum, ASCMC, or Elections Committee (whoever was in charge) put out “incorrect information” two times in a row. When the student government gives out “incorrect information,” all I can do is deal with the “incorrect information.” Thanks for telling me to go to the Hub because I did and it wasn’t posted up there 4 hours after the election had ended.

          All I’m trying to say is that it is the responsibility of ASCMC to put out election results properly which they obviously failed to do so and not to blame students for trying to correct “incorrect information.”

  5. Elections Committee, do we know if the turnout was higher with online elections? And with the new system, turnout by class? Just curious/procrastinating physics problem set [:

  6. I hope that Gavin realizes that the race was very close and that the majority of people votedfor him because he seems like the more qualified candidate. They did not vote for
    him (for the most part) because they agree with his goal of settling with the
    administration. In fact, most surveyed would
    say that they agreed with Falk’s idea of siding with the student body in order
    to not let DOS and Dean S in particular continue to bully ASCMC into slowly
    giving up the privileges that make CMC great.

    However, Nate did not seem up to the job
    and I hope Gavin realizes that he is representing the whole school, not just a
    certain quad or group of students.

    CMC is unique for many reasons, one of
    them being the incredible leaders that make us awesome. Here is to an awesome
    year full of excellence, hard work, and of course, epic amounts of raging that
    make first semester this year an exception, not a rule.

  7. I find the Forum’s failure to accurately report the results of something as important as ASCMC elections to be an indication of its continuing lack of professionalism. Instead of offering an apology for misreporting the figures, they state that they have “updated” them. Typically, an acknowledgment of some sort regarding a mistake would have been made.

  8. Hi guys!
    Don’t mean to create more controversy but did anyone get more than one unique link (ballot) in their emails? I got three. The first two were the same (Came around 2AM) and the last one had a completely different url (Came at 3AM). I was wondering whether or not that had an effect on the election? I voted for the first ballot but when I woke up in the morning, there was another one so I just voted with that ballot as well. I’m sure there are people who voted right away when the results came out and didn’t vote afterwards.

    • Hi Everyone;

      I apologize for any of the confusion that surrounded the online voting this year. I’ve been working for some time to get it implemented, but as with any new system, there are occasionally glitches.

      Now, many freshmen did get different ballots. Why? Because there was an initial version of the election created (at 2 AM) that ended up having some incorrect information involved. Rather than altering the entire election and costing the student body more money, I decided to cancel the initial, 2AM election, and create a new one.

      You all received a ballot at 3 AM containing the real election that determined who your representation is this coming year. However, the old one still was in everyone’s inbox. So, for everyone who voted twice, don’t worry, the first votes were recorded in an old, defunct election that had no bearing on the current results. That election was deleted, and anyone trying to vote was redirected to the new election. However, that redirect took some time for the website to work-in, resulting in a few “duplicate ballots”.

      Now, the key is that these duplicate ballots ended up functioning as one vote. If you were one of the victims of the glitch, the system’s inbuilt security features disregarded your initial vote in favor of your second, most recent one. As such, while people may have voted twice, they only had one recorded vote.

      I hope that clears up any questions. Please feel free to email me at [email protected] if you have any more questions, or just comment right to this thread. The online voting system was something that I brought to the school this year after months of research and testing, and I can assure you that the results are safe, accurate, and decidedly representative of all who voted.


      Aseem Chipalkatti
      ASCMC Campus Organizations Chair
      [email protected]

      • What if I only voted in the 2AM election? Did my vote get transferred to the new 3AM election and get counted there?

        • Yes – the system had an inbuilt mechanism for the very very minuscule amount of votes that were affected by this.

  9. The Forum reported the election results and percentages it received from the ASCMC Elections Committee. Results were updated as errors were pointed out. No final results are different than the original report.

    Thank you for your patience!

Comments are closed.