The art of the RTR

“Can we have a few minutes of your time?” It’s a familiar phrase that comes after a few knocks on the classroom door, one that can only mean one thing during General Elections (GE) season—it’s time for aspiring University Student Government (USG) officers to make their names and platforms known to the student body through room-to-room (RTR) campaigns.

RTRs have always been an integral part of campaigning, as both political parties and any independent candidates roam the hallways and enter various classrooms in an effort to sway the electorate into voting for them. For those running, it’s a tried and tested avenue for publicizing platforms and agendas, but what do those on the receiving end think?

 

From the students

In a survey conducted by The LaSallian, most students agreed that RTRs were an effective tool in convincing people who to vote for, with 60 percent of respondents saying that this method of campaigning was informative in terms of the different platforms presented. 27 percent disagreed, saying that RTRs were not helpful, while 13 percent remained unsure of their assessment.

 

“It makes the students aware of the parties and their platforms, which is important in choosing leaders.”

Several students positively described RTRs as a helpful tool in getting to know the different candidates and their proposed projects and ideas, such as the above quote from Luke* (I, AB-OCM). Fellow freshman Jane* (I, BS-ECE2) agrees, calling RTRs a “civil method of conveying the message [of] candidates to their respective constituents.”

Kris* (III, AEF-FIN) also views RTRs in a positive light, sharing, “[They] encourage me to listen and be open to the platforms/GPOA/SPOAs of the candidates, which is collectively a good basis for voting. RTRs package the platforms and deliver them to classrooms for the students’ convenience.”

 

“It’s one way of [having] a direct conversation with students.”

Ben* (III, AB-CAM) appreciates RTRs because they allow candidates to build personal connections with their constituents. Danielle* (II, AB-POM) agrees, saying, “[They] provide a way to keep in touch with the students directly.”

Other than building connections, however, respondents also commended RTRs for providing an opportunity for students to evaluate the skills of those aspiring for seats in the USG. “[RTRs] help us familiarize ourselves with the candidates, since we are able to witness how they speak in public, and their confidence when it comes to the positions that they are running for,” shares Paul* (I, BS-PSYC). “The RTR is the only way for me to know how they speak and what their platforms are,” adds Joy* (II, AB-POM).

 

“I’d rather you talk to me than you scream at me in a classroom.”

On the other hand, some respondents like Vann (III, AEI-ADV) are tired of this form of campaigning, critical about the actual substance of the speeches delivered. Evan (IV, BS-AEL) adds, “RTRs are a waste of my time, especially when the statements are vague and repetitive.”

Sam* (II, ADV) calls this form of campaigning annoying, saying, “I’d take substance over form any day.” Miguel* (III, AEF-BSA) points out that “memorized lines and synchronized shouting don’t show how well a person can lead and represent their platform.” Rae* (III, AEF-BSA) agrees, saying, “[RTRs] only showcase a candidate’s ability to speak in front of a crowd and not [their] ability to get the job done.”

 

“Waste of time. Affects studies.”

A significant portion of respondents further lament that RTRs are an obstruction to classroom discussions, and can thus affect their academics, as Jose* (III, AEF-MKT) points out. “Nakakabastos sa oras ng students and teachers,” Pat* (IV, BS-MKT) comments. Meanwhile, Ash (III, AEF-APC) sees both the negative and positive aspects of this kind of campaigning, saying, “[It] disrupts classes, but it takes a lot of time and effort to do. Kudos to the candidates that work really hard to get their platforms across.”

Others argue that the RTRs are unsuccessful due to their time constraint. Patrick (III, AEF-MKT) asserts that “[RTRs are ineffective] because they are given only a limited time to show their platforms.” Jasmine* (I, BS-CS) agrees, saying that the allocated time of these speeches are “not enough for me to assess the candidates fully.”

 

“Some speakers aren’t genuine.”

Derrick* (III, AEF-BSA) criticizes how the RTRs may not be authentic. He is not the only member of the electorate who dislikes the current style of RTRs–Ina* (III, AEI-MGT) agrees with him, saying that the spiels are “scripted, [and] sound like party driven robots.”

“They seem pushy and fake,” Annie* (III, AB-CAM) remarks, critical of how some candidates may appear to students. On the other hand, Vince* (I, ISE-BSA) sees both the positive and negative aspects of this form of campaigning. He praises the speeches for giving proper exposure to candidates, but remarks that “[parties] need to focus on raising awareness of the students’ platforms, instead of style and ‘signature’ campaigning.”

 

From the candidates

Delivering speeches with enough passion, conviction, and confidence, while trying to convince your audience of your sincerity and integrity, and all without missing a beat or making a mistake—doing these RTRs can’t be easy. And yet, all candidates vying for positions in this year’s GE must go through them.

Those running have a unique challenge—to capture the students’ attention, explain their stories, and deliver their message, all in under five minutes. However, students exposed to these kinds of campaigning may underestimate just how difficult or nerve-wracking these spiels are. Those who deliver them make it look easy, but just how challenging is the art of the RTR?

 

“I hated RTRs, but it brought me out of my shell…”

Kaye Baguilod (IV, AE-APC) ran for the position of EXCEL2015 Vice-President during the 2014 General Elections under Santugon sa Tawag ng Panahon (Santugon). She mentions how most students are able to appreciate this kind of campaigning, but those that don’t have to realize that the purpose of RTRs is for the benefit of the students themselves. “It takes a lot of preparation (and guts). Hindi siya madaling i-prepare!”

Kaye furthers that both RTRs and person-to-person campaigning are necessary because they allow the students to understand what the different candidates plan to achieve should they be elected into office. As for her, she believes that the best way to persevere through these nerve-wracking campaigning is to “know your vision by heart [and] reflect on what you really want to achieve.”

 

“I felt nervous the whole time, but my goal as a candidate kept me going.”

Neiman Sevilla (III, AEI-MGT), who ran for EXCEL2016 Vice-President during the 2015 General Elections under Alyansang Tapat sa Lasallista (Tapat), stresses the importance of quality preparation in the delivery of RTRs. He shares that he believes that students appreciate the effort that goes into these stressful campaigns. However, “only time [will] tell if the candidate’s efforts deserve to be appreciated.”

Neiman acknowledges that this kind of campaigning has both its positive and negative aspects, and that whether or not it does its job largely depends on the delivery, timing, and flow of the message itself. He goes on to mention how he wouldn’t always master the delivery and would sometimes make mistakes in his speeches. “I stuttered and forgot main points in my message… I would [just] sigh and practice for the next one,” he explains.

 

“I was mocked and sometimes laughed [at] by the people in the room.”

Carlos Recto (II, POM) ran as Batch President of FAST2014 during the 2015 Special Elections under Tapat, but encountered some criticism along the way. “No matter how much they shame and persecute you, just remember that you are not fighting with them, but you are fighting for them,” he explains his mentality.

He furthers, “We cannot deny the fact that there will be students who don’t mind you and won’t listen to you when you deliver your message, especially because they feel that the USG is not working. But it’s not just about the people who you face… but rather, it is about reaching and convincing people to fight and stand with you in promoting your platform.”

 

“I would feel agitated to do RTRs, yet I actually enjoyed them and learned lessons along the way. It was fulfilling…”

Not everyone who delivers RTRs gets uneasy about them. Ted Cuaresma (I, PSM) ran as FAST2015 Legislative Assembly Representative during the 2015 Special Elections under Santugon, and enjoyed the idea of getting to know the batchmates who he might eventually work with throughout the year. “[The] RTR serves as our opportunity to share with [students] our vision and plans of action during our term as elected officers,” Ted describes the importance of this campaigning.

However, he also made his fair share of blunders. “During one of our RTRs, we were asked by one professor to do our campaign in Filipino. Since I was not ready for it, I felt so awkward speaking in front, and I may have said things that were slightly different to what I actually [meant],” Ted shares. “The campaign period during last year’s Special Elections was a learning process for me. It was certainly one for the books.”

Before students, especially those critical with the USG, immediately dismiss the candidates who approach them and interrupt their classes with explanations of platforms and plans of action, it helps to envision yourself in their shoes. Again, these RTRs aren’t easy—on the contrary, they require patience, effort, and confidence to master—but time and time again, candidates accept the challenge.

Carlos summarizes the candidates’ view on RTRs succinctly. “It has always been a privilege and an enjoyment to interact with the students face-to-face, and deliver [to] them what [we] are fighting for.”

 

*Names with asterisks (*) are pseudonyms.