Trevor Tobey for SA president

By Thresher Editorial Board     2/25/25 11:15pm

Due to his previous Student Association experience, knowledge about SA logistics and passion for transparency, we, the Thresher Editorial Board, endorse Trevor Tobey for SA president.

If you have déjà vu, so do we. Tobey ran for this very position in last year’s race, when we endorsed his opponent — now-President Jae Kim. Our editorial board has now spent over a year getting to know Tobey and his policies. We can confidently say that his platform has evolved remarkably since last year, and we have more confidence in his ability to enact change.

Having served as a new student representative, Hanszen College senator and, most recently, SA parliamentarian, Tobey has a true understanding of how to navigate the SA’s complicated mechanisms. 

---

---

And, despite his loss last year, we welcome Tobey’s commitment to the SA. He has a vision to make a difference; he has returned this year with knowledge of how the administration works, adjusted the feasibility of his plans and researched his proposals more. 

Simply put, Tobey shows up. In a time where we constantly bemoan the SA’s lack of engagement, from plummeting voter turnout to empty races, we firmly believe the SA needs someone like Tobey — someone who cares.

We applaud write-in candidate Callum Flemister for their eagerness to make a difference, and believe they truly have the capacity to do so. However, the SA — for better or for worse — is riddled with bureaucracy. It demands candidates with experience, and with innate knowledge of how the SA works. 

Flemister shares many of Tobey’s goals, like increasing the accessibility of study locations and engaging with the student body, but we feel Tobey’s experience and knowledge make him more likely to follow through on his promises. While Flemister has conducted an impressive write-in campaign, we fear it may fall short because of their lack of SA experience.

Last year, we questioned why Tobey wasn’t running for treasurer — his platform was all about the money. This year, he seems to have a larger understanding of the president’s role, proposing policies about social life, administrative neutrality, late-night dining, improved efficiency and, yes, still more money. 

We’ve clashed with Tobey before over his financial policies, and still believe many of his proposals — including ones on the ballot today — could use further work. We still worry that his priority is the money, when there’s so much more at stake. If Tobey is elected, we encourage him to remember that the SA is larger than the $400,000 it collects.

At the Pub debate, he stressed the importance of political neutrality. While we agree that the SA should first reflect the interests of campus, we also acknowledge there is mass uncertainty surrounding higher education in the U.S.: from federal funding cuts to diversity, equity and inclusion. We encourage Tobey to constantly consider what neutrality truly means, and to continue fostering open lines of dialogue between the SA, the student body and cultural clubs.

In our endorsement interview, we asked Tobey a question: As a formally uncontested candidate, how will he build trust among a student body that has not decisively elected him? It’s a question that several spates of uncontested candidates have had to grapple with.

He didn’t quite answer the question. But it’s true that few students know how the SA works, and even fewer seem to care. Whether he’s elected decisively — or apathetically — if Tobey assumes the presidency, we encourage him to remember his own words from last year:

“If you ask the average student, I think they would have a hard time answering ‘What has the Student Association done to make your time on campus better? I think that’s problematic.”

---