One losing candidate described it as “the worst Union election in living memory”.

Hyperbole perhaps, but Saturday’s (26/11) results, which saw James Appiah III elected president of the Cambridge Union, was the end of a bitterly fought campaign which became engulfed in accusations of racism, bribery and voter intimidation.

Appiah, who beat closest rival Ellie Breeze to the Easter presidency by sixteen votes, is the first black male president of the world’s oldest continuous free speech society. He is also this term’s chair of the Cambridge conservative club (CUCA).

The race saw four candidates from Cambridge’s main political societies - CUCA, the Labour and the Liberal clubs (CULC and CULA) - face off for the first time in a Union election. The count went to a fourth round after former CULC chair Sam Carling and current CULA president Joshan Parmar were eliminated in rounds two and three. Breeze had previously served briefly as CUCA’s speakers officer and this term has been the Union’s equalities officer, a role once held by Appiah.

The results were announced at 10.20pm in a febrile, half packed Union chamber which had waited several hours past the expected time to find out who had won the election. The delay came after an electoral complaint, the last of many charged at Appiah, arrived at 17.59pm, one minute before voting closed.

As members waited, rumours swirled that Appiah had been disqualified from the election. The complaint, this time about Appiah’s use of a third party Instagram page to campaign, was eventually ruled out by the returning officers.

The final announcement that Appiah had won 201 votes to Breeze’s 185 was celebrated wildly by his supporters, many of whom were wearing black tie after coming to the chamber from a CUCA social. Appiah’s de facto campaign manager, Sal Widdicombe, said after the result: “This is a win for the members and a win for democracy”.

This view was not shared by the other side of the house. Leaving the chamber many wore sombre faces and a few were crying. Recriminations began almost immediately.

Much of the anger was directed at the Appiah campaign, whose members have been nicknamed the “4chan gang” in an apparent reference to the message board frequented by “edgelord” young men with right wing views.

The “4chan gang” tactics were the subject of the series of electoral complaints against Appiah, allegations including bribing voters with club tickets, threatening subcommittee members and the use of Widdecombe’s own Instagram account to campaign, which he had previously used to become speaker’s officer. The Union election rules prohibit the use of third party Facebook pages, though doesn’t specify whether this extends to Instagram.

There are also incendiary claims from rival camps that the “4chan gang” had a secret list of members they would accuse of racism if Appiah had lost the election.

Appiah has denied all accusations, describing them as, “outlandish in nature.

“It should be noted that the minimal complaints which were lodged against my campaign - for which I fully cooperated with investigating authorities - were dismissed.”

He went on to say: “I look forward to transitioning away from the pettiness of campaign season and implementing my reformist platform to make the Union better for all.”

Anger was also directed by those who had lost at CUCA, which Appiah ran this term. Their presence at the count in black tie following a social was seen by some Union members as emblematic of what the Union will look like in Easter.

“It’s an incredibly sad day for access at the Cambridge Union”, one Union committee member lamented, “when half the chamber is divided by men in black tie who can jeer and talk over the returning officer”.

“This sets the tone for what the Cambridge Union will be like [in Easter]”, they said.

CUCA is itself divided: on election night there were two rival Tory socials, one for Appiah and another against. One CUCA committee member has also resigned, seemingly in protest against Appiah's victory. 

What next? Supporters of Carling, Parmar and Breeze are considering their options: launching an appeal to the Union’s trustees, orchestrating resignations from Union committees in protest or even trying to pre-emptively impeach Appiah. Changes to the constitution are also being considered by next term’s committee to make impeachment easier.

One well informed Union insider who saw their candidate lose was more sanguine: “It’s over. A lot of people want to convince themselves they can overturn an election but they can’t.”

Meanwhile, new battle lines are being drawn. Appiah campaigned against “cliquism” in the Union in an apparent reference to Breeze’s friends’ prominence throughout the Union committees. In Appiah's manifesto he said: “After every election the next Union clique forms. The Union ends up becoming quite nepotistic, with friends appointing friends and the culture being an unwelcoming one. If elected, I will crack down on this culture from the top”.

The two most likely candidates to run for president next term are one of the “clique”, CULA vice-president Max Ghose, and Widdicombe, a face-off made more dramatic since the two are next term’s debates and speakers officers respectively. For Widdicombe to stand he would have to switch degrees - as part of his Chinese studies he is due to go on a year abroad next year - a decision many in the Union wouldn’t discount.

In the background of all of this are questions over the tenor of the Easter 2023 term card, in particular the scope of debate motions. This term has seen the committee wade further into “culture war” issues, such as the recent debate on offence with guest speaker Kathleen Stock, while also seeking to find space for progressive topics, like the well received event on reproductive rights. Some Union critics of the “4chan gang” fear Easter term might see much more of the former than the latter.

Appiah has promised to make his term more entertaining with  a boxing match in the Union chamber. The question remains who's going to be in the ring come Easter.

This article was updated on 29/11.