As for the voting, the last few elections in particular have been when I have seen it most, the more well known managers stating on site to get others to rally behind a certain manager. Is it legal? Yes. Is it smart? Maybe. But it is what can lead to this outcome. In all seriousness though...I'm just completely irate over the situation.
Understand you're upset, but your criticism is really unfounded. I mean, you just said:
I agree 100% that he had the most impressive resume at the time. He trained Bowens who is one of the best and was active in conversations.
So you agree RamQ was the best candidate at the time. He was elected. This is typically a good thing. Yet now that it didn't work out, you're criticizing the process of electing the best candidate because it lead to something bad.
This term didn't work out. 38 of us, myself included, made the wrong choice. But I don't understand why you're criticizing "more well known managers" for this. What should they have done differently?