The 2025 student body election at Texas State University was anything but quiet. Between resurfaced photos, last-minute campaign shake ups, and a heated debate, all eyes were on Abby Myers, the psychology junior who would ultimately go on to win the presidency. But behind the posters, statements, and group chat debates lies a bigger story: What does it really take to lead in a space where public opinion moves faster than policy?
Abby Myers may have won student body president at Texas State University, but it wasn’t without a fight or a fair share of controversy. With a photo scandal, last-minute campaign shake ups, and a debate that felt more like a battleground than a Q&A, the “Bobcats First” candidate became one of the most polarizing figures in this year’s election. Still, she clinched the win by 18 votes.
But what does it mean to lead when nearly half the student body didn’t vote for you? What happens when your campaign becomes more talked about than your platform? And what does “girlbossing” even look like in the messy world of student government?
With everything that unfolded, the bigger question remains: What does it say about TXST that a candidate under so much scrutiny still won?
Who’s Who
The 2025 student government race boiled down to two alliances: “Bobcats First,” led by psychology junior Abby Myers and international student Niko Markovic, and “Shooting for the Stars,” led by accounting sophomore Jordan Hunter and sustainability advocate Emma Stampley.
Myers ran on a platform focused on accessibility and support for underrepresented students, often citing her experiences as a first-generation college student and her long-standing involvement in student government. Her VP pick, Markovic, brought in an international lens, emphasizing the need for visibility and empowerment for students who often feel left out of campus leadership.
Their opponents, Hunter and Stampley, emphasized student engagement and coalition-building across orgs. Hunter, already well-known on campus for his leadership roles, brought sharp debate skills and strategic thinking to the campaign. Stampley, already the Director of Sustainability for TXST Student Government and Panhellenic Council President, pitched her campaign as a continuation of her long-standing commitment to TXST students.
The race was close, but things took a sharp turn just before the debate.
The Controversy
Hours before the debate, students opened YikYak and Reddit to find a resurfaced photo of Dakota Autrey, a senatorial candidate who was endorsed by the “Bobcats First” ticket and featured in campaign photos, dressed as an ICE agent and posing beside someone wearing a MAGA hat. The image had originally been posted to Autrey’s public Instagram account in February but was deleted before campaigning began in early March. Although the post was no longer visible, a screenshot of it began circulating online and quickly sparked outrage. Students criticized the alliance’s messaging, pointing to the contradiction between the photo and the ticket’s platform, which claimed to “amplify all voices” and included an international student. The “Bobcats First” team later released a statement distancing themselves from Autrey. Students called out the hypocrisy of the alliance’s messaging, especially when its platform claimed to “amplify all voices” and included an international student on the ticket.
The photo was posted around noon. The official “Bobcats First” response came just 30 minutes before the debate.
The campaign distanced itself from Autrey in a brief Instagram statement, saying he was no longer part of the ticket. But the timing didn’t sit right with many students. Was it real accountability or just damage control?
Why I Asked For The Interview
After the photo surfaced and the election results came in, I wanted to know more. The statement from “Bobcats First” didn’t answer everything, and the debate only raised more questions. I reached out to Abby Myers for an interview – not for a puff piece, but for an honest conversation about what really happened. To her credit, she agreed.
We talked about it all: the photo, the backlash, her win, and what it means to lead when the campus is divided. What follows are excerpts from that conversation, and what I learned when I asked questions students still wanted answered.
The Debate Fallout
I was there. I watched it all unfold.
When questions about the ICE photo came up at the debate, Abby stuck to the talking points. She referenced the campaign’s Instagram statement and said nothing more. There wasn’t an acknowledgment of the harm or a deeper explanation for his actions. She simply said, “I only worked with Dakota professionally.”
However, Dakota’s Instagram – the same one with the photo – showed Trump GIFs from frat brothers and other signals that went beyond “just professional.” If Myers’ campaign was about amplifying all voices, especially marginalized ones, how did this happen?
I asked her directly: Didn’t that concern you?
“I agree that I could have done more in-depth Instagram finding,” she admitted. “But I’d worked with him in the Senate, and nothing there told me he didn’t align with our values.”
The audience that night seemed split – not just politically, but emotionally. Myers’ supporters, many from the Honors College LLC, where she served as an RA, looked visibly irritated when the photo was brought up. Some rolled their eyes. Others sighed. Two students asked powerful questions about the damage this caused to Hispanic and immigrant communities. The room grew tense.
When I asked Abby about the crowd’s reaction, and how her own base responded, she said,
“I wish that hadn’t been the reaction, obviously. Those were really excellent questions. I appreciated the students who came and asked them.”
But the moment felt more like avoidance for a candidate whose platform was built on accountability.
Too Little, Too Late?
In our interview, Myers confirmed what many students suspected, and what her opponent, Hunter, had accused her of during the debate: the campaign had heard rumors about the photo days before the debate — not the day of, as some assumed.
“We weren’t having the open and honest dialogue we wanted,” she said of their conversations with Autrey. “There’s levels to this now.”
They confronted him about the image and its context. He claimed it was part of a political skit, supposedly satirizing ICE, but a video never surfaced.
“We tried to have a fact-finding conversation,” Abby told me. “And when that didn’t happen, and when people on our team said, ‘I’m not comfortable with what he’s representing,’ we agreed he had to go.”
But still, the statement removing him from the ticket came thirty minutes before the debate.
So why the delay?
“We’re students – we’re still in class. We were trying to coordinate when everyone could meet,” she said. “It wasn’t like we timed it to drop right before the debate. We just weren’t all on the same page until then.”
I pressed her again: wasn’t that damage control?
She didn’t say yes, but she didn’t say no, either.
The Numbers Don’t Lie… But They Confuse
When the election results dropped, things got even messier. Abby won the presidency with 1,021 votes. But her VP, Niko Markovic, lost to Emma Stampley by just one vote. Jordan Hunter – Emma’s running mate, received 1,003 votes, as did Niko.
That kind of symmetry is rare. Too rare to ignore.
“It was very confusing,” Abby admitted. “There’s no real way to figure out what actually went on.”
She said she even called it the night before.
“I told a friend, ‘The thing with the highest percent chance is me and Emma splitting.’ She had the Greek vote, and I had more visibility. It just kind of made sense.”
Gendered Scrutiny or Earned Criticism?
Throughout the campaign, Myers highlighted her identity as a woman and a first-generation college student. I asked if she felt the backlash was personal or gendered.
“I don’t think most of it was about me specifically,” she said. “But I do think when a woman’s in leadership and she’s actively doing things, people will still try to tear that down. That wasn’t fair.”
Fair or not, students didn’t just question her gender, they questioned her judgment. And when the backlash came, Myers didn’t always answer right away.
What Now?
Despite everything – the backlash, the questions, the awkward split – Abby Myers won. And she’s ready to move forward.
“Even if you were one of Jordan’s 1,003 voters, I’m still here to serve you,” she told me. “I want to be available. I want to keep having these conversations.”
When I asked what this experience taught her, she said:
“The second you step on Texas State’s campus, you’re a member of student government – whether you know it or not. That means we’re supposed to represent everyone. And we can’t do that if we’re disconnected from the people we serve.”
And she made it clear she’s already thinking about what comes next:
“We are supposed to be here to represent you guys, and be able to build people up and represent their voices, and we can’t do that when we’re disconnected from the larger student body,” she said. “So I’m really excited to get to work on integrating those things – because that’s where a lot of those initiatives are gonna be able to happen. Spiritual initiatives, sustainability initiatives, and amplifying voices across campus. That happens when we better integrate.”
If this election taught us anything, it’s that leadership isn’t just about winning. It’s about who you listen to, who you choose to stand by, and who you answer to when things get uncomfortable. And this year, they definitely did, and the student body won’t forget it anytime soon.