After the heated events of night number one, the second instalment of The Bubble Debate: Elections Special was believed to be a calmer affair. The LSUTV live stream was in full working order after the previous night's difficulties, and the candidates and our very own 'Firing Squad' were ready to go!

Connor Pearce was back on top form, with appropriate puns to boot regarding the previous night’s events, as the Firing Squad of Jago Pearson, Chris Carter, Sophie Pettifer and John Constantinou, were introduced to the audience. The gauntlet was thrown down for our SocFed, Rag, Media, Action and AU candidates tonight with Pearson stating from the offset; “scrutinising candidates developed true victors.” Let the debate begin…

First on set came the beaming smile of SocFed Candidate Georgia ‘Ginger Spice’ Cheyne, who was able to formulate well-versed answers from the audience, and there was much praise for her meticulous knowledge on the Societies Federation. Despite bringing up some ideas that had previously been implemented by former SocFed Presidents, Sophie Sanders, from one former Pole Society chair to another, gave her full support.

During Georgia’s time in the hot seat, it became somewhat apparent that the Firing Squad might have found tonight’s debate problematic, as none of the four members have had any form of vast experience within SocFed, Rag or Action. However, all showed extreme professionalism in their questions, and had clearly done their research on tonight’s candidates.

Mike ‘Linebacker’ Lyness and Paul ‘Ragnam Style’ Nanson were next to the podium, running for Rag Chair. Current Chair Max Turner started proceedings by stating his delight that Rag was contested in this year’s elections.

Both Mike and Paul wore their hearts on their sleeves, sharing their passion for Rag and why they have been so involved in the section. However, when the discussion of manifestos came to the forefront, Jago Pearson challenged Lyness on his reasons for running after declaring he was considering running for Union President, but held his own to solidify his reasons for running, despite the ‘controversial Mr Carter calling Lyness a ‘loose cannon’ in comparison to Nanson’s ‘safe pair of hands’. However, the talking point of the evening followed as Lyness inferred that Max Turner did not possess the ‘people skills’ of previous Rag Chairs.

Post-Debate, Nanson spent some time talking to Label: "I think it went really well. Although I would like to have been asked more Rag-specific questions rather than general points from the Firing Squad. I thought the comment about Max was unfair as participation has been up in the past year."

After defending his statement towards Max Turner, Lyness told Label: "I felt the debate went ok, but it was strange how the Firing Squad focussed on me; I felt it was a little unfair on Paul. I believe I'm the best candidate and that's why I'm running, but if people think I'm too truthful, then they are entitled to their opinion."

Third on the candidate list came uncontested candidate for Head of Media, Helen ‘Hands On’ Crossley. Crossley was chatty as always upon arrival and seemed raring to go in discussing her points.

Like many of the candidates’ manifestos, Crossley was highly focussed on promotion of LS Media sections, and fought tooth and nail in the defence of the use of social media against the Firing Squad, rejecting the idea of it being a ‘lazy’ form of promotion. Crossley also responded confidently to the controversial topic of a ‘muzzled publication’ that Label has become, in the eyes of the Firing Squad.

When the evening came to a close, Helen told Label "I think the Debate went well but it would have been easier I had an opponent to bounce points between, both giving our ideas and reducing the pressure a little. The comments from the Firing Squad regarding Label have to be taken with a pinch of salt really, as the publication they support has outcomes very different to those of our Label magazine."

In the penultimate round of discussions, the candidates for the closely fought position of Action Chair, Michael ‘Action Air’ Jordan and Sarah ‘Heart’ Haar, were invited to the stage.

Both candidates were prepared to answer questions regarding the commonly discussed topic of quality versus quantity of volunteers, promotion of Action events, the merging and collaboration of sections and even whether the candidates were running to be a part of Exec or solely to be Action Chair. Even host Connor Pearce proclaimed, “even I can’t call this one!”

In hoping that her passion had been conveyed, Sarah Haar told Label, "Billy (Marsh) has done a lot of work to rebrand the section, and I am hoping to be continuing the development of his efforts this year. Me and Michael have both agreed that it would have nice to move the focus to other areas of our manifestos, rather than focussing on one specific point for so long."

And last but very much not least, the hotly contested battle of Athletic Union President bought Jennie ‘Call On Cooper’ Cooper and Tim ‘Ginger Jenks’ Jenkins onto the set, both candidates bringing vocal reactions from the audience.

The dividing topic of the catastrophic kit deal was first to arise, yet both Cooper and Jenkins answered confidently, with views from both the AU Exec and AU team perspectives, both citing the communication to all AU members as vital. Despite the even nature of the debate throughout, in the final throws, Cooper finished with a strong argument in answering a question from the Firing Squad, receiving a positive reaction from the audience.

Cooper followed this by talking to one of our Label reporters: "In a debate situation I definitely think that being contested is better, because you feel like you are arguing against something and two sides of the story can be put forward.  With regards to being contested, it’s always a worry, but at least it is healthy competition and I can honestly say that I’ve enjoyed myself tonight." Cooper also stated that being a female candidate should have no effect on voting, but should focus on the experience and manifesto points that are brought to the table.

Jenkins was complimentary of Cooper after the debate and highlighted the similarities between the two, despite their different backgrounds: " I think it's hard to say, Facebook and Twitter our posters, but at the end of the day that's campaigning squad against campaigning squad and it's hard to filter out who the independent voters are actually going to vote for at this stage."

At the end of proceedings, well-deserved appreciation was given to LSUTV, Elections Coverage Teams and VP Democracy and Communications Ali Cole for the fantastic double-bill of The Bubble Debate streamed live on

From everyone here at LS Media, we thoroughly hoped you enjoyed our coverage over the two nights, and please let us know your opinions in the comments section below. And make sure you haven't missed out on any of the action from round one of The Bubble Debate by reading the Label Online follow-up right here.



Comments are closed.