And then there were three....

[runaroundsioux]

Teddy was a Republican.

[TBR]

Teddy was a Republican.

Nothing wrong with that. I like Kasich and even a few things Rand Paul has to say...

[Hayduke]

Teddy was a Republican.

Yes, he was.

Both political parties have changed a lot over the last 100+ years.  He was a progressive Republican.  Very few of those exist today. 

[fightingsioux4life]

Teddy was a Republican.

TR would be a Democrat today, as would Lincoln and Eisenhower. None of those three men are "pure" enough for today's GOP.

Anyway, I support Roughriders 100% and I encourage everyone reading this to think about the future of UND and that this vote could very well determine which name we are stuck with (for better or worse) for the rest of our lifetimes and beyond.

Go Riders Go!

[runaroundsioux]

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”        

Theodore Roosevelt on Immigration

Yep, sounds just like a modern day Democrat. 

[fightingsioux4life]

Yep, sounds just like a modern day Democrat. 

Look at his work in conservation, environmentalism, regulating big business and siding with labor over management. Those attributes alone would disqualify him from today's GOP. But nice job cherry-picking.

[SIOUXFAN97]

i work with two und students...i asked one what nickname he voted for and he said he didn't vote but he would have voted nodaks...i offered him five dollars for him to vote RR and i'm pretty sure we will settle for seven dollars or a little caesars pizza...one more for RR.  the other student voted FH because of the cool logo...i showed her the "_____ Hawks Gif" and she looked dumbfounded...she said she probably isn't going to vote again because of kelly's switching things mid vote but if she does i'm pretty sure it won't be for FH!!

[Cratter]

Yep, sounds just like a modern day Democrat. 

Saw that on facebook, unrelated to the UND nickname yesterday.

I agree with him and I'm a Democrat...or wait I like to think I'm a libertarian (I loved Ron Paul)....or wait I also relate with Socially liberal; fiscally conservative Republicans...I'm confused.

I'll just call myself a guy who knows what's right for America (just like TR...thats why he's so loved across this great country). 

Edited November 1, 2015 by Cratter

[Goon]

 

 

Only 116 votes separated Nodaks and Roughriders.  I'm no fan of Kelley, but he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't with this one.

I hold both parties in contempt, both parties full of corrupt politicians. 

Edited November 1, 2015 by Goon

[dakotadan]

Wait, I'm confused. Which name are Republicans supposed to vote for and which one for Democrats? 

UND Hillaries? 

I guess it's better than nodaks or hawks. 

[zonadub]

Yeah I've been a life long hunter but dislike big game & killing just to say u got one as a trophy

Y'all are applying 21st century political correctness to this process (as you are with some of the quotes attributed to TR). Wild game trophy hunting was not considered to be a negative circa 1900. Political correctness is what got us into this mess in the first place, and now you are aligning with the PC crowd in your arguments. 

 

Edit: if you deer hunt for that trophy buck, you aren't trying to get the tasty meat, those big guys are not tasty.

Edited November 1, 2015 by dakota

[Fetch]

Oh I've had buck fever but grew out of it - I quit deer hunting altogether - I came to the conclusion that big game hunting is wrong long before Cecil or PC - In fact I hate most things considered PC  - Teddy seemed to have a lot to prove & most of what he proved was spot on

But being a roughrider is not something I look forward to

[fightingsioux4life]

Y'all are applying 21st century political correctness to this process (as you are with some of the quotes attributed to TR). Wild game trophy hunting was not considered to be a negative circa 1900. Political correctness is what got us into this mess in the first place, and now you are aligning with the PC crowd in your arguments. 

Edit: if you deer hunt for that trophy buck, you aren't trying to get the tasty meat, those big guys are not tasty.

And that is why some species are on the endangered list right now. Overhunting didn't cause problems at first because of the abundance of targets, but it did cause problems over time. Overhunting has caused ND Game and Fish to limit deer hunting licenses to keep from killing off the entire herd. And people spent hours on talk radio b*tching and moaning about how "unfair" it is. Can't have it both ways.

[TBR]

Y'all are applying 21st century political correctness to this process (as you are with some of the quotes attributed to TR). Wild game trophy hunting was not considered to be a negative circa 1900.

No. We are not being PC. In your own words you noted that during TR's time trophy hunting "was not considered a negative", and it was pictures of TR with his kill that started this discussion, not, for example, pix of Walter Palmer

[Millionaire]

For what it's worth, this was my message to the Alumni Office today:

 

Dear Alumni Office:

 

I'm appalled to read that President Kelley decided he should (even could!) change the established nickname voting process on the fly.

 

1. Changing the voting rules in the middle of the process gives an appearance of manipulating the election.

 

2. A three-way vote can result in the least-liked choice winning a plurality. (This defeats the *primary purpose* of a run-off.)

 

The voting process must be designed to get over 50 % of voters to have voted for the eventual-winner, so we can move forward. President Kelley has put the university in a situation where it may need to choose between a third round of voting or proceeding without public support and integrity.

 

If there is no majority in this second round, holding a third round is vital to successfully moving forward.

 

I wanted to address President Kelley himself, but I cannot find an email address for him. I would appreciate it if you could forward this to the president's office.

[fightingsioux4life]

For what it's worth, this was my message to the Alumni Office today:

Dear Alumni Office:

I'm appalled to read that President Kelley decided he should (even could!) change the established nickname voting process on the fly.

 

1. Changing the voting rules in the middle of the process gives an appearance of manipulating the election.

 

2. A three-way vote can result in the least-liked choice winning a plurality. (This defeats the *primary purpose* of a run-off.)

 

The voting process must be designed to get over 50 % of voters to have voted for the eventual-winner, so we can move forward. President Kelley has put the university in a situation where it may need to choose between a third round of voting or proceeding without public support and integrity.

 

If there is no majority in this second round, holding a third round is vital to successfully moving forward.

 

I wanted to address President Kelley himself, but I cannot find an email address for him. I would appreciate it if you could forward this to the president's office.

Ask.....and you shall receive!

robert.kelley@UND.edu

[Siouxphan27]

For what it's worth, this was my message to the Alumni Office today:

 

Dear Alumni Office:

 

I'm appalled to read that President Kelley decided he should (even could!) change the established nickname voting process on the fly.

 

1. Changing the voting rules in the middle of the process gives an appearance of manipulating the election.

 

2. A three-way vote can result in the least-liked choice winning a plurality. (This defeats the *primary purpose* of a run-off.)

 

The voting process must be designed to get over 50 % of voters to have voted for the eventual-winner, so we can move forward. President Kelley has put the university in a situation where it may need to choose between a third round of voting or proceeding without public support and integrity.

 

If there is no majority in this second round, holding a third round is vital to successfully moving forward.

 

I wanted to address President Kelley himself, but I cannot find an email address for him. I would appreciate it if you could forward this to the president's office.

they decided a few days ago there will be a third vote if none of the choices receives over 50% in the second round of voting.

[82SiouxGuy]

For what it's worth, this was my message to the Alumni Office today:

 

Dear Alumni Office:

 

I'm appalled to read that President Kelley decided he should (even could!) change the established nickname voting process on the fly.

 

1. Changing the voting rules in the middle of the process gives an appearance of manipulating the election.

 

2. A three-way vote can result in the least-liked choice winning a plurality. (This defeats the *primary purpose* of a run-off.)

 

The voting process must be designed to get over 50 % of voters to have voted for the eventual-winner, so we can move forward. President Kelley has put the university in a situation where it may need to choose between a third round of voting or proceeding without public support and integrity.

 

If there is no majority in this second round, holding a third round is vital to successfully moving forward.

 

I wanted to address President Kelley himself, but I cannot find an email address for him. I would appreciate it if you could forward this to the president's office.

You might want to catch up. This was announced on Wednesday. http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/local/3870797-updated-third-vote-possible-und-nickname-school-wants-win-majority

UPDATED: Third vote possible for UND nickname, school wants win by majority

By Anna Burleson on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:46 p.m.

 

 

 

UND’s new athletic nickname will be decided by majority vote, meaning there’s a possibility a winner won’t be chosen until well into November.

 

The school announced Wednesday if none of the three options up for next week’s runoff vote receives more than 50 percent of the votes, a third round of voting will be held shortly after.

[siouxfan512]

Wait, I'm confused. Which name are Republicans supposed to vote for and which one for Democrats? 

UND Hillaries? 

I guess it's better than nodaks or hawks. 

Wow, I just threw up in my mouth

[SWSiouxMN]

Let the madness begin once again...

[LuvHockey]

Just a little bit concerned about this vote after issues today....

First, I was allowed a vote right away last time- first vote.

This time I was --unexplained why-- left off the list to vote, until 2 days later.....when they noticed I was missed

Really?? I am an alum, a donor, a season ticket holder, and a faculty member. 4 ways eligible

How do you miss me?

And can we rely on this system--one that can be that bad???

[petey23]

Teddy was a Republican.

well no one said he was all bad.

[SJHovey]

 

Anyway, I support Roughriders 100% and I encourage everyone reading this to think about the future of UND and that this vote could very well determine which name we are stuck with (for better or worse) for the rest of our lifetimes and beyond.

This seems a little overly dramatic.

There is a reason that only about a fourth of the eligible voters actually voted the first time around, and probably fewer the next.  There's a reason you can go online and for a few bucks buy a vote.  There's a reason why no matter what name is selected, it will be fine with me.

It doesn't really matter.  It's a nickname.  UND is going to do quite nicely no matter what name is selected.  I think I can say with 100% certainty this will be the most insignificant vote(s) any of you will ever cast, outside of your vote for 7th grade class president.

[jdub27]

There is a reason that only about a fourth of the eligible voters actually voted the first time around, and probably fewer the next. 

The main one being that anyone with an e-mail address on file (valid or not) got counted as an "eligible" vote whether they cared or not.  That number would mean a lot more if people had to actively register to vote.

If you want some sort of basis for actual active supporters directly of UND athletics instead of some random catch-all number, there were approximately 2,600 Champions Club memberships in 2014-2015, people that donate yearly to UND athletics.

[fightingsioux4life]

This seems a little overly dramatic.

There is a reason that only about a fourth of the eligible voters actually voted the first time around, and probably fewer the next.  There's a reason you can go online and for a few bucks buy a vote.  There's a reason why no matter what name is selected, it will be fine with me.

It doesn't really matter.  It's a nickname.  UND is going to do quite nicely no matter what name is selected.  I think I can say with 100% certainty this will be the most insignificant vote(s) any of you will ever cast, outside of your vote for 7th grade class president.

Well, based on the passions I have seen expressed on this forum, I would have to disagree with you. And all this talk of whatever name is chosen being replaced within a couple of years is highly unlikely. The reason for the low voter turnout is how horribly mismanaged the process has been from start to finish.