# Elections under Robert's Rules: President "recommending" a candidate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 3, 2006, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131 "2006-10-03T18:05:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jackelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@jackelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackelope)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2006, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/1 "2006-10-03T18:05:41Z")
I’m a third-year law student. Today one of our student “law societies” had its first meeting, at which officers were elected. The society’s constitution states that meetings will follow Robert’s Rules of Order. I was hoping to be elected an officer, because (a) I’m extremely interested in the society’s subject matter, and (b) I’m extremely interested in getting something on my résumé besides a scholarship and a string of fair-to-middling grades. I ran for vice-president; the other candidate and I left the room for the secret ballot. I was defeated. I ran for Publishing Editor; the other candidate and I left the room for the secret ballot. I was defeated. I was a bit embarrassed, but not too upset. After the meeting, though, several people mentioned to me that after the president closed the door, he said, “I’d really like to see [**jackelope** ’s opponent] win this position.” Then they voted. Is this proper under Robert’s Rules? I can’t find anything about presidential impartiality in [the rules](http://www.rulesonline.com/), but it struck me as unprofessional. I’m probably more burned up about this than I should be. Both of my “opponents” apparently had advance warning from the president that candidates would be giving speeches at this meeting, while I didn’t, even though I contacted the president a week ago to ask about this. They were obviously prepared to speak, and I was just as obviously extemporizing (which I’m not terribly good at). The only reason I can think of for the president’s preference for the other candidates is that he may have overheard me calling him a subliterate moron at some point. I doubt that, though. (I.e., I doubt that he heard me; I’m completely certain he’s a subliterate moron.) ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2006, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/2 "2006-10-04T17:36:56Z")
[QUOTE=jackelope] Is this proper under Robert’s Rules? I can’t find anything about presidential impartiality in [the rules](http://www.rulesonline.com/), but it struck me as unprofessional. [/QUOTE] Your link includes the following comments: > [@](#): > > The chairman sometimes calls a member to the chair and takes part in the debate. This should rarely be done, and nothing can justify it in a case where much feeling is shown and there is a liability to difficulty in preserving order. If the chairman has even the appearance of being a partisan, he loses much of his ability to control those who are on the opposite side of the question. There is nothing to justify the unfortunate habit some chairmen have of constantly speaking on questions before the assembly, even interrupting the member who has the floor. One who expects to take an active part in debate should never accept the chair, or at least should not resume the chair, after having made his speech, until after the pending question is disposed of. The presiding officer of a large assembly should never be chosen for any reason except his ability to preside. If the president really acted as you were told, he seems to have been in breach of several of the above protocols. ---
**Author:** ![jackelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@jackelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackelope)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2006, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/3 "2006-10-04T18:36:30Z")
[QUOTE=Freddy the Pig] If the president really acted as you were told, he seems to have been in breach of several of the above protocols. [/QUOTE] I agree; I spoke to him about it this morning (having calmed down from my original plan to stage a coup at the next meeting and take the reins myself) and, while I don’t think he acted with personal malice toward me, he’s definitely not at all contrite. At one point during our conversation he said, “It’s my club; I started it, I can choose the rules.” “You _did_ choose the rules,” I pointed out; “you chose Robert’s Rules of Order, which you then disregarded.” The conversation did not improve after that. I guess I’ll renounce my membership and start my own club. With blackjack! And hookers! In fact, forget the club! (Actually, maybe I’ll start a “Parliamentarians Club.” That might be fun.) ---
**Author:** ![btconley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b3f665/32.png) [@btconley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/btconley)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2011, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/4 "2011-08-28T00:30:54Z")
The Futurama reference is awesome. In our City committee meetings I see this type of behavior a lot. They say its okay. It’s not. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2011, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/5 "2011-08-28T02:38:56Z")
I see I came too late, but the above posters are correct. The chair is not to take sides in a debate according to Robert’s Rules. It is even a breach of etiquette for him to turn over the proceedings to the vice-chair and speak from the floor. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2011, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/6 "2011-08-29T04:39:53Z")
What’s that quote about faculty politics? “Why is faculty politics so vicious? Because the stakes are so small.” More than applicable here… I’m sure the chairman will ace his ethics exam and become an exemplar of the law profession. The problem here is - yes he violated the rules about Roberts Rules of Order; so what? Who’s going to call him on it if he is the ultimate authority in his little fishbowl. Get together enough people to put the issue to a debate and he’ll rule the motion out of order or someone will call the question or table before the debate can get rolling. If he can’t get toadies to do it, he’ll do it himself from the chair. And so on… You don;t need the aggravation. If the rest of the club voted as he asked, what’s the point of trying, unless you can sign up your own horde? Was it Lenin or Trotsky who found that the secret to dictatorship was to run the agenda so you could control what was debated and voted on…? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2011, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elections-under-roberts-rules-president-recommending-a-candidate/375131/7 "2011-08-29T06:17:43Z")
Yes, obviously the solution is to declare him Trotskyist scum.