Obama Campaign Fed Up with Ivy League Interns

by | July 24, 2008 at 8:32 pm

From a mystery source within the Obama campaign come some updates/accusations targeted at proactive Obama-lovers in the ivy league. According to the political blog Open Left, Obama’s campaign has “had it up to their ears” with ivy interns getting in the way of business, even adding fuel to the Republican’s fire. Contributer “KosherDutchAfro” writes:

My source within the Obama campaign in Chicago has told me campaign employees have had it up to their ears with overly ambitious Ivy League volunteers who have been causing problems for the campaign by putting their individual ambitions over the larger goals of the campaign as a movement. This employee and fellow South Side native has shared with me that the campaign is getting a sense that the attitudes of dedicated Ivy League volunteers had, over the course of the primary, given Republicans enough stories to run with the ‘elitist’ trope in the general election.”

What are these kids doing: arguing over who gets to plug those numbers into an excel sheet? Or… maybe it would be more relevant to ask: who is this KosherDutchAfro, and why all the crazy haterade for us innocent ivy leaguers with big political dreams? Because later on in the post he writes about how Obama’s loss to Clinton in the Pennsylvania primary can be blamed on “pushy” Penn students:

In Pennsylvania, where the campaign lost big time to Hillary due to pushy Penn students stoking conflict with long-time city activists, the Obama campaign has instituted a training that teaches volunteers how to be senstive to existing communities.”

OK. Fine. We know that this sort of insensitivity can be a problem not only amongst ivy league students, but also within the ivy league administration. So maybe this kind of training isn’t such a bad idea after all. But isn’t blaming Obama’s loss on a few Penn students taking it a bit far? And wait…didn’t Obama attend ivy league universities himself? According to the mystery source, “Senator Obama himself feels Ivy League graduates have held sway over Washington too long and even though he attended Harvard and Columbia, if elected, he intends to do very little hiring from the Ivies.”

Now this is truly scary. Because if this is potentially true, it’s grim news for us rising seniors. Hell, if nepotism is going out of fashion in politics, I’m never getting a job next year.

UPDATE: Information has emerged which casts doubt upon the motives and claims of the tipster “AfroDutch.” It appears that nothing he told us can be taken as reliable — to the extent that this post should be considered wholly compromised. There is absolutely no evidence of bad blood between the Obama campaign and Ivy Leaguers. -HP

 
12 Comments | |
 
 Print This Post
 
Read more: ,
  • Cool-umbia08

    Man, Penn ruins everything for the rest of us.

    Also, never use amongst. Just use among.

  • Cool-umbia08

    Man, Penn ruins everything for the rest of us.

    Also, never use amongst. Just use among.

  • Cool-umbia08

    Man, Penn ruins everything for the rest of us.

    Also, never use amongst. Just use among.

  • Tully

    Maybe this still is surprising to people, but I would bet money that Obama pretty much loathed his experience at Columbia, and probably for good reason. During the early 1980s, when he went to Columbia, NYC was in terrible shape, and Columbia was faring not much better. The school itself nearly went bankrupt in the 70s, and things weren’t much better. My father also went to school at this time, and when I started high school, his advice for the college search was, you can go to any school in America, just whatever you do, don’t go to Columbia. That’s beside the point, but Obama’s dislike of the Ivies is nothing new, and isn’t all that surprising.

  • Tully

    Maybe this still is surprising to people, but I would bet money that Obama pretty much loathed his experience at Columbia, and probably for good reason. During the early 1980s, when he went to Columbia, NYC was in terrible shape, and Columbia was faring not much better. The school itself nearly went bankrupt in the 70s, and things weren’t much better. My father also went to school at this time, and when I started high school, his advice for the college search was, you can go to any school in America, just whatever you do, don’t go to Columbia. That’s beside the point, but Obama’s dislike of the Ivies is nothing new, and isn’t all that surprising.

  • Tully

    Maybe this still is surprising to people, but I would bet money that Obama pretty much loathed his experience at Columbia, and probably for good reason. During the early 1980s, when he went to Columbia, NYC was in terrible shape, and Columbia was faring not much better. The school itself nearly went bankrupt in the 70s, and things weren’t much better. My father also went to school at this time, and when I started high school, his advice for the college search was, you can go to any school in America, just whatever you do, don’t go to Columbia. That’s beside the point, but Obama’s dislike of the Ivies is nothing new, and isn’t all that surprising.

  • princeton09

    By the way, “Ivy League” is capitalized.

  • princeton09

    By the way, “Ivy League” is capitalized.

  • princeton09

    By the way, “Ivy League” is capitalized.

  • franky1

    Obama is an fool if he honestly believes these students cost him Pennsylvania, although I doubt that is the case. I think it is more of a simple matter of blaming someone else for his own losses. He was favored over Hilary by more than 3 to 1 among (just to make you happy cool-umbia) Penn democrats, and that is despite never visiting campus. To put it in perspective, Hilary, Bill and Chelsea were all here more than once. I’m not quite sure how he got so many Whartonites to drink his kool-aid and blindly ignore his economic views (which almost directly oppose their own) but that is beside the point. Before he makes absurd claims, he should look at the actual election results. He owned Philly and the nearby counties (Philadelphia county I believe by like 30 points), so I don’t think the students working for the campaign cost him too much with “long-time city activists.” He actually made up a lot of ground in the weeks preceding the election, but ultimately lost to Hilary due to her dominance in the Western part of the state, particularly among (almost went with “amongst” there, but I caught myself. you’re welcome.) older voters.

    You may be able to tell that I don’t support Obama (though I do admire him in a few ways). I do, however, support those students who were willing to volunteer for him to promote a cause that they valued. Now that people can see that he has inculpated these students despite having no base for his claims, I hope that some start to question just how noble and willing to accept responsibility he will be as President. However, I’m sure most people already became weary when they read that he planned to shun a host of intelligent, hardworking individuals wanting to enter the government solely because of some preconception (prejudice?) he has about their attitudes. Punishing these recent or soon-to-be grads for having “held sway over Washington for too long” is so absurd that it would almost be comical, if it weren’t such a real possibility.

  • franky1

    Obama is an fool if he honestly believes these students cost him Pennsylvania, although I doubt that is the case. I think it is more of a simple matter of blaming someone else for his own losses. He was favored over Hilary by more than 3 to 1 among (just to make you happy cool-umbia) Penn democrats, and that is despite never visiting campus. To put it in perspective, Hilary, Bill and Chelsea were all here more than once. I’m not quite sure how he got so many Whartonites to drink his kool-aid and blindly ignore his economic views (which almost directly oppose their own) but that is beside the point. Before he makes absurd claims, he should look at the actual election results. He owned Philly and the nearby counties (Philadelphia county I believe by like 30 points), so I don’t think the students working for the campaign cost him too much with “long-time city activists.” He actually made up a lot of ground in the weeks preceding the election, but ultimately lost to Hilary due to her dominance in the Western part of the state, particularly among (almost went with “amongst” there, but I caught myself. you’re welcome.) older voters.

    You may be able to tell that I don’t support Obama (though I do admire him in a few ways). I do, however, support those students who were willing to volunteer for him to promote a cause that they valued. Now that people can see that he has inculpated these students despite having no base for his claims, I hope that some start to question just how noble and willing to accept responsibility he will be as President. However, I’m sure most people already became weary when they read that he planned to shun a host of intelligent, hardworking individuals wanting to enter the government solely because of some preconception (prejudice?) he has about their attitudes. Punishing these recent or soon-to-be grads for having “held sway over Washington for too long” is so absurd that it would almost be comical, if it weren’t such a real possibility.

  • franky1

    Obama is an fool if he honestly believes these students cost him Pennsylvania, although I doubt that is the case. I think it is more of a simple matter of blaming someone else for his own losses. He was favored over Hilary by more than 3 to 1 among (just to make you happy cool-umbia) Penn democrats, and that is despite never visiting campus. To put it in perspective, Hilary, Bill and Chelsea were all here more than once. I’m not quite sure how he got so many Whartonites to drink his kool-aid and blindly ignore his economic views (which almost directly oppose their own) but that is beside the point. Before he makes absurd claims, he should look at the actual election results. He owned Philly and the nearby counties (Philadelphia county I believe by like 30 points), so I don’t think the students working for the campaign cost him too much with “long-time city activists.” He actually made up a lot of ground in the weeks preceding the election, but ultimately lost to Hilary due to her dominance in the Western part of the state, particularly among (almost went with “amongst” there, but I caught myself. you’re welcome.) older voters.

    You may be able to tell that I don’t support Obama (though I do admire him in a few ways). I do, however, support those students who were willing to volunteer for him to promote a cause that they valued. Now that people can see that he has inculpated these students despite having no base for his claims, I hope that some start to question just how noble and willing to accept responsibility he will be as President. However, I’m sure most people already became weary when they read that he planned to shun a host of intelligent, hardworking individuals wanting to enter the government solely because of some preconception (prejudice?) he has about their attitudes. Punishing these recent or soon-to-be grads for having “held sway over Washington for too long” is so absurd that it would almost be comical, if it weren’t such a real possibility.