On the evening of Nov. 18, 2025, Drew University Student Government and the Drew Acorn hosted a Presidential Debate in room LC 28, below the library. Drew’s student body was also invited to listen in on the debate and ask their own questions to the candidates.
The night started with the Elections Chair, Jordyn Casanova-Ghosh (‘28), introducing themself before the Acorn correspondents and debate moderators, Sabr Keres-Siddiqui (‘27) and Katie Germinder (‘27), also introduced themselves. The debate was then handed over to the Presidential candidate teams to give their opening statements to the audience.
The first statement was given by Kevin McMillion (‘27) and Samuel Mbir-Bondzie (‘27), with a focus on the dining services and athletics. According to McMillion, his team has plans to begin working with the head of Gourmet Dining to improve overall food quality.
Edgar Guzman (‘28) and Kayla Kiernan (‘28) went next, addressing that they want to engage with students and make actual change. They plan to advocate and address accessibility issues, a better dining experience, residence hall concerns, better gym equipment and a better platform for club advertisements. Guzman & Kiernan made it clear that they wanted to be easily accessible to students and hear all their concerns.
Arya Patel (‘27) and Aidan Rosser (‘27), going third, highlighted their already-established experience in student government. Patel pointed out how she had created a new position for commuters in Student Activities and plans to work with alumni to create new scholarships, especially for the psychology department.
The floor was then opened up to the audience to ask questions about any specific ticket or to the candidates in general. The Acorn started by asking about student body communication with the presidential and vice presidential candidates.
Communication
McMillion emphasized that his and Mbir-Bondzie’s emails are always open to students to ask questions and voice concerns. Mbir-Bondzie also added that there is a “lack” of marketing and advertising for events being held on campus. He suggested ways to improve outreach, such as relying more on Instagram and word of mouth.
Guzman, responding to the same question, said that he is working to make an easily accessible general inquiry form so that it is easy for constituents to have their concerns heard by Student Government. Guzman also highlighted that there should be a “better way” to communicate events and to be transparent about things happening at Drew, saying that all voices should be heard.
Patel, meanwhile, highlighted how she is actively engaged with the head of Student Activities, and, if elected, would appoint someone from her cabinet to correspond directly with the Student Activities department to be able to sponsor meaningful dialogue.
StuGov Accountability
When asked about Student Government accountability, McMillion highlighted how events to discuss dining concerns have little attendance due to low advertisement and are not marketed to the student body. Members in committees should take actions, he stated – and if they do not do so, that person could be “booted” from the committee. McMillion urged StuGov members to “take the job seriously [and] make serious changes,” and emphasized how all of StuGov must work together and come together in a “united” way.
Guzman and Kiernan used a similar example to McMillion, saying that power should be given back to the people when it comes to accountability. Guzman said that he has “already been open” to discussing constituent concerns as a senator, and plans to continue to do so as president.
Kiernan added that she would address it as a “systemic” change in Student Government. Adding that she would “be on top of committees and hold them accountable,” she highlighted finding passion within the committees, instead of “just checking a box on their resume.” She emphasized how her administration would hold itself accountable and fill seats with people who will take action to improve the Drew community.
Patel largely focused on keeping senators’ projects going that affect the student body as a whole, using current senator Thomas Jenkins’ (‘28) project of installing a StuGov voicemail service as an example. Jenkins’s project involves using a dedicated phone line for students to call or text to flag concerns to Student Government, which Patel highlighted as a potential opportunity for communication. Like Guzman, she also said she plans to use Google Forms to elicit responses from the student body, and also highlighted a willingness to “rework” and “enforce” policy.
What Each Candidate Brings to the Table
McMillion and Mbir-Bondzie both highlighted a desire to “serve and help” everyone in the student body. They said that they wanted to spend as much time as possible to truly enact change, and compared it to “going into battle with the people around you” instead of against them. They also highlighted ambition to make real change, stating that they wanted not just to check a box off, but to truly help the community through a new approach to the presidency.
Patel highlighted “diversity” in being the only female candidate, which, although true in terms of only presidential candidates, elicited sharp questioning from female Vice Presidential Candidate Kiernan of the Guzman-Kiernan ticket. Rosser also highlighted “gumption” and the importance of resisting the Trump administration in the federal government; however, Rosser notably did not seem to connect his answer to this question back to students in any meaningful way.
Guzman highlighted the importance of “perspective” on community voice. He emphasized the benefits of his being involved with many clubs and theater organizations, as well as his already-close ties with Student Government. He said he and Kiernan would use engagement with the community to help Drew grow, adding that they would use the way the system works to their advantage to make change and help constituents be seen and heard.
Dealing with Controversy
McMillion and Mbir-Bondzie both emphasized a strong sense of unity, saying that there should be constant dialogue and understanding so that both students and Student Government can come to a conclusion regarding what is best for the campus community. Referencing what he called the “McMillion-Dollar Way,” he said that connection to the student body is important, and said he would shelve his own pride if it meant that he could come to an agreement with the student body. All six candidates present, added him and Mbir-Bondzie, have the same “end goal”: to make Drew a better place where people will want to come to and build a legacy in.
Kiernan highlighted “de-escalation” of conflict and a strong willingness to work with the community. Similar to McMillion, Guzman also focused on uniting all sides of an issue to come to a common solution. Highlighting past examples, Guzman emphasized the achievability of actual change when students come together as a community. He added that his and Kiernan’s administration would be staying on top of issues and would be here for the community, “not to fill their resumes.”
Patel also highlighted a willingness to carry on the legacy of current President Zaire Wright (‘27) by holding town halls frequently with constituents to give them an opportunity to voice their concerns. She said that she sees town halls as an “open forum” for questions and concerns that should continue, also highlighting that all dialogue starts with a conversation.
Addressing Pressing Issues at Drew & Long-Term Projects
McMillion highlighted how he has begun to work closely with dining heads to enact better nutrition quality. He referenced a Google Form that he helped set up that was previously sent out to constituents to understand what students want to see and what concerns they have about food on campus. Mbir-Bondzie added that he would like to help athletes build nutritious meal plans so that they can get the necessary types of food to fit their specific regimens. Mbir-Bondzie and McMillion also emphasized transparency regarding what is in food – for example, calories and allergen information being placed front-and-center.
Guzman and Kiernan highlighted a desire to appeal to overlooked voices in the community. Kiernan, in particular, emphasized accessibility for disabled students and those with dietary restrictions. Allergen options are lacking, she pointed out, adding that it is not fair that students with allergies are at the “bottom of the barrel.” Kiernan added that food at the Commons should have better labeling and that everyone in the community should be heard. Both she and Guzman said they would like to work with cultural clubs to amplify their voice, and would “fight like hell” to make sure concerns are heard.
Patel, similar to the other tickets, emphasized how dining options for actual cooked meals are “limited in quality and quantity.” She suggested options to bring residential and commuter communities together and make sure their concerns are addressed and heard. Rosser also emphasized a “collective bargaining” approach and said he may work with alumni donors to fund better gym equipment for the Baldwin Gym and Simon Forum as well.
Open Student Questions
One audience member asked the candidates in general how they might plan to improve the experience of international students at Drew. All three tickets responded with plans to help build community amongst INTO students on campus, as well as to reassure students during any possible visa or employment turmoil they might be struggling with as a result of the Trump administration’s recent immigration policies. “I want the best for everybody,” said McMillion.
Another constituent asked Rosser: “As vice president, one of your jobs is to run the Senate and to bang the gavel…I’d like to ask you: how can I trust you to run the Senate when you can’t stop interrupting both the moderator and other candidates?,” referring to when he had repeatedly interjected during moderators’ and other candidates’ remarks on more than one occasion. Rosser responded that because he was on Zoom instead of in-person due to his being in London, he “had to be a little bit pushy” to be heard through the call, and that “people would decide” if they liked his style and personality or not.
A viewer online asked how the candidates might work with clubs in terms of general support during their administration, and another asked how their ‘project issue’ might be balanced with other issues they may be expected to face during their administration. All three tickets responded with plans to balance club budgets and StuGov funds in order to ensure that they are used appropriately and in the most sustainable manner possible, with many candidates planning to hybridize events to be able to provide the most services to students while still saving costs.
All three tickets heavily emphasized service to the Drew community in their closing statements, highlighting their own plans for the future of Drew and the further development of the student body as a whole. Voting will be held on the Path or in person on campus on Dec. 1, 2025. For more information on this year’s election, visit the StuGov Path page or the StuGov Instagram handle at @duclasga. The complete recording of the debate can also be viewed at tinyurl.com/stugovdebate.
Katie Germinder is a senior majoring in environmental studies and sustainability and double minoring in anthropology and media and communications. Sabr Keres-Siddiqui is a junior majoring in political science and double minoring in journalism and sociology.
