Princeton Occupiers Have the Most Condescending Sign Ever

A photographer onscene at Occupy Wall Street’s May Day demonstration caught a gaggle of Princetonians marching with the commoners. Guess what their banner said.

EVEN PRINCETON. Get it? Edgy. Cool. SubversiveMore photos here.

Given that Princeton is less a university than the X-Mansion of Wall Street analysts, it would seem vastly more serious—and so much cooler, frankly—if, in addition to interrupting on-campus recruiting sessions for Goldman and JP Morgan, these earnest students left. Dropped out. Transferred.

For good.

Remember that Goldman VP who wrote mean things about his employer in the New York Times? Well, he quit.

Until Princetonians make some kind of transfer-to-Hampshire-College pact, the eyeballs of every New Yorker shall continue to roll throughout Midtown, sort of like that Sony commercial with the bouncy balls:

Photos by Michael Discenza

“This Is Just The Beginning” of Princeton’s Worst Website

FuluMail, the online intimidation tool recently founded by two Princeton students, is undergoing renovation. Here might be why: over the past few weeks, FuluMail has transmitted a staggering amount of intimidating, threatening, semi-illiterate FuluMails—most of which are quickly deleted from the website, but not before delivery to their intended recipients.

“We are not a hate mail service,” according to the footer of

We were able to capture a handful of the nastier messages before the site went down a few days ago. They’re like dark emissions from Princeton University’s collective id: stalking, bullying, threesomes in the Charter Club’s bathroom, and so on. Here are five samples from FuluMail’s Hall of Fame: Read the rest of this entry »

Prince Article Based Entirely on Off-the-Record Quotes from Politico Reporter, Other “Political Heavyweights”

Per the star-spangled Daily Princetonian, a Monday debate moderated by Politico’s Jonathan Martin

pitted former Republican National Committee chairman Mike Duncan and former George W. Bush communications adviser Jim Dyke against Press Secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Jesse Ferguson and former Communications Director for the House Budget Committee Nu Wexler.

Three different commenters on the Prince’s website state that the debate—on which the Prince’s article is based entirely— was conducted off-the-record. Or, in American, don’t quote us on this:

I attended the event and all the participants clearly stated they were doing this discussion off the record.

And: “Remember when all the participants said that they were doing the discussion off the record?” And: “These things were pretty clearly off the record.”

That didn’t stop the Prince from publishing an 810-word article which promiscuously quotes Martin et al’s political banter. Zero of which amounted, as far as we can tell, to any actual revelations—but still! Journalism! Integrity! Ethics! Etc. The dailies are supposed to be the good guys, remember?

REPORT: Ivy Leaguers Tell IvyGate What Admissions Numbers Actually Mean

The numbers that are the dick-measuring contest known as Ivy League admissions are finally in, and IvyGate could think of no better way (we didn’t try that hard) to gauge the different school’s reactions by taking to the streets to interview students and determine their (hilarious) reactions to the statistics.

Brown University rolls in (alternatively, “wraps up”) with an admission percentage of 9.6%, a .6% increase from last year! When asked about this rise, I was met with stony eyes and this response: “Brown recently discovered that admitting more students meant more money from tuition. The following year admissions rose higher than for any other Ivy League institution. Where do you think we got the money for our new pool?”

Columbia coasted into a .5% increase from 6.9% last year, on which a student commented,

I’ve never looked at Columbia’s admissions the way others look at it. Others look to decrease the number to appear better. Columbia has always let in more than they can, because we’re not looking to falsify our admissions statistics, though they will automatically be low, as it is an Ivy League school.

Yeah…you can only expect so much from a school in baby blue.  Read the rest of this entry »

Shirtless Princeton Student Wants to Anonymously Intimidate You

Princeton’s Bobby Grogan ’13 (as seen on his website’s homepage) pitches FuluMail like so: We aren’t fancy, we’re for the average person. The concept is simple. A website that allows you to send emails anonymously. No frills here. Have a boss you don’t like but can’t say something to his face? Have a teacher you can’t stand? That’s our pitch — vote for us.

OK, so this—this pitch, for, presented by this guy, and printed in Princeton’s daily newspaper—is just so beyond the realm of snark or criticism or even reason that it feels pointless to say what normally would need to be said—that this is the dumbest, most goddamn irresponsible thing we’ve ever heard of. This dude is pitching his site as a way to anonymously intimidate human beings. That’s what he’s selling.(Even College ACB—yes, COLLEGE ACB—pretended to promote “deep and thoughtful discussion.”)

From the Prince we learn that after Grogan presented this idea at a Princeton conference for entrepreneurs, he met up with one of its judges (a visiting lecturer), who encouraged Grogan’s plan without having any idea what Grogran was talking about: Read the rest of this entry »

Ranking the Haze: These are the Haziest Members of the Ivy League

Last week we ranked the laziest of the Ivy League: those schools at which hazing is non-existent (or, possibly, so underground as to avoid detection). Yes, you may have been wondering, but who are the haziest Ivy Leaguers? So here they are, beginning with the laziest of the haziest: Princeton.

One thing to remember about these rankings—and, to a degree, about all of the Ivy League—is that hazing (both the phenomena and the perpetual scandal) is more or less the outcome of combining two very different populations: the world’s future overlords and the anxious, striving individuals who will form tomorrow’s press corps.

It makes a ton of sense, anyway, why the Ivy League is almost always awash in one hazing scandal or another. What else would you expect? The Ivy League attracts students who willfully submit themselves to the judgment of schools which constantly market, and profit from, their exclusive reputation. They bring together people who, for whatever reason, need to constantly distinguish themselves in as many ways as possible, no matter how illogical or arbitrary or pointless those ways are. Add to that a well-funded press corps with a taste for scandal, and voilà! Hazing controversy!

To get rid of hazing in the Ivy League, you’d have to stop admitting the very people who applied to any of its schools. You’d have to start admitting people who don’t care about reputation, or status, or prestige; about feeling (and, yes, being) better than others. But then the Ivy League wouldn’t be the Ivy League, would it?

Anyway! Here are the haziest members of the Ivy League: Read the rest of this entry »

Admissions Controversy: It’s 2006 All Over Again!

Remember that Yale freshman (and soon-to-be Harvard transfer) who filed a civil rights complaint against Princeton because he believed that Old Nassau had rejected him for being Asian? After which The Daily Princetonian mocked the complainant by, um, making fun of him for being Asian? 2006: stellar year for race relations in the Ivy League!

Minus the race-baiting Prince column, it’s happening all over again, this time with an unnamed Asian-American of Indian descent, who has filed complaints with the Office for Civil Rights against Harvard and Princeton for discriminating against Asian applicants. The complaints have stirred sundry responses of equally mild outrage. Even the more right-wingy op-eds read as though their authors are posed in perpetual shrugs.

There may be a decent explanation for the befuddling lack of concern, as Daniel de Vise of the Washington Post argues. The entire basis for the 2006 complaint, and the current complaints against Princeton and Harvard, is that Asian applicants whom either school admits almost always possess the highest SAT scores of their class. However, as de Vise points out:

[R]emember that Asian-Americans outscore all other racial and ethnic groups on the SAT. A college where Asian students have lower SAT math scores than whites would be a statistical oddity.

Which means the whole problem is more likely found in that sinister totem of elite colleges: holistic admissions. As both a phrase and an idea, “holistic admissions” is sort of misleading: it describes the method whereby colleges admit a carefully calibrated freshman class, not individual applicants. Such a process contradicts the bizarre caricature that statistical studies paint of college admissions. To draw a meaningful conclusion from, say, this Princeton study, you’re required to imagine that admissions committees serially pit the applications of two students against each other, much like an episode of Celebrity Deathmatch. (Which would be really exciting to watch, no?)

Probably the biggest concern is that if Harvard and Princeton can be found to discriminate against Asians based on statistics alone, then pretty much every elite college (with the exception of Berkeley, and apparently CalTech) can be found to discriminate against Asians. If that’s true, it would be an enormous (and very newsworthy) conspiracy. And if it is a conspiracy, then Harvard and Princeton appear to be exceptionally incompetent conspirators: though Asians account for some 5% of the U.S. population, they make up, respectively, 17% and 19% of Harvard’s and Princeton’s undergraduate bodies.

Mitch Daniels Is the Stoner Princetonian Who Might Save the GOP

So, Mitt Romney, huh? While Mittens continues to alienate pretty much everyone with his proletarian LARPing and overall blasé demeanor, elements of the GOP are still holding out hope that there could be a late-entry candidate to replace him. (We’re going to assume that Newt bursts like an overripe pumpkin before the Florida vote.)  Who, though? Right now—indeed, at this very moment—those mysterious Establishment Republicans are probably wheedling Princeton alumnus, Governor of Indiana, and total stoner Mitch Daniels ’71.

Tonight, Daniels will deliver the GOP response to Obama’s State of the Union address. The occasion raises vital questions. Like: who is Mitch Daniels? What eating club did he eat at? Which and how many drugs was he on? Here’s your IvyGate Cheat Sheet Thing©, The Mitch Daniels Edition:


  • Woodrow Wilson ‘71, then Georgetown Law ’79 (campaign website)
  • Member of Charter Club, which uses sign-in (Daily Prince)
  • “Active in the campus antiwar movement” (Ibid.)
  • Member of Princeton’s College Republicans (Ibid.)
  • Vietnam: Daniels “legally deferred his eligibility while in college and after graduation his draft number, 147, was high enough that he was not called.” (Republic Candidates)


  • “Daniels was arrested, indicted and convicted on charges of drug use as an undergraduate in May 1970”. (Daily Prince)
  • Which drugs? Weed, LSD, and unidentified pharmaceuticals. (Ibid.)
  • How much weed? Two shoeboxes full of weed. (Ibid.)
  • Drugs were an “unfortunate confluence of my wild oats period and America’s libertine apogee.” (Ibid, Washington Post)
  • What did Daniels get? A night in jail and a $350 fine. (Ibid.)
  • Was that normal? Ha, no.“Six months after [Daniels’s] arrest, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided a case involving an 18-year-old who was caught with a tiny amount of pot (clearly just for personal use) and got a sentence of two to three years in prison. (


  • Favorite color: blue (VoteSmart profile)
  • Governor of Indiana since 2004
  • Senior advisor to Ronald Reagan
  • Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget under George W. Bush
  • His marriage is a Jonathan Franzen novel (Republican Candidates)
  • Has a personal cheerleading section led by William Kristol, Harvardian and Weekly Standard editor/founder (The Weekly Standard)
  • Slight resemblance to William F. Buckley, Jr., he of God and Man at Yale fame, maybe? Yes? No? Come on, it’s obvious.

But will he run for President?

  • “For a Republican hero to ride in on a white horse, it would take a scenario that verges on political science fiction.” (TPM)

Genius Princetonians Will Reform Wall Street by Working for Wall Street

No matter how many famous novelists in its employ, Princeton University is firstly a grooming school for bankers. With that in mind, the student-led Occupy Princeton has, for about a month now, protested (i.e., TERRORIZED) several recruitment events hosted by human rights organizations such as J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs. Which has struck many of the group’s betters as kind of . . . bizarre, yeah? Don’t these people want . . . money? And a summer property in an equatorial country? What else are we here for??

Fortunately, chipper Prince contributor Elise Backman ’15 and Prince columnist Aaron Applbaum ’14 have offered a time-tested solution to appeasing Occupy Princeton: Just work for Wall Street! Easy! You’ll fit right in!

Applbaum, from January 9:

It is true that the Princeton students of today traditionally become the Goldman partners of tomorrow, but chanting at them repetitively only serves to alienate them, not to change their minds.

Traditionally? Unless that awful Henry Moore sculpture is in fact a secret wormhole to Lower Manhattan, working for Goldman Sachs is about money, not one’s ride on the Long Orange Line.

Becoming more politically engaged and discussing fiscal policy, I believe, is the way to shift the dialogue and create the change sought after by the Occupy contingency. I see this as a way to alter, and break through our [in]famous complacency. This is not to say that Washington is exclusively at fault for New York’s behavior — both financiers and policy makers are to blame for their actions — but the two are inextricably tied and an opening for change right now lies in the political arena.

This is the counter-argument to the Occupy movement’s rather explicit charge that money has corrupted American politics? Unless Alan Greenspan recently rewrote several founding documents, no, “financiers” and politicians are not “inextricably tied.” Well, they are, of course. But that’s the problem, not an a priori truth.

And here’s Prince contributor Elise Backman, from January 11:

When I have tried to discuss Occupy Princeton with my friends affiliated and unaffiliated with the movement, at the first sign of a critique I am met more often than not with, “Oh, of course, you just want to go make money on Wall Street,” “Don’t you care about the economy at all?” or my favorite: “You’re so politically apathetic — how Princeton of you.” Are we all suddenly politically apathetic if we don’t support Occupy Princeton?

Oh yes, the very reasonable “friends” argument: my friends said something, so everyone thinks it. QED! But wait: Read the rest of this entry »

With Revived Harvard and Princeton EA Programs, Fewer Early Applicants at Yale, Columbia, Penn

Harvard and Princeton reinstated their early admission programs for this year’s admissions cycle. According to this nifty chart put together by Jeremy Bleeke of the Columbia Spectator, ED/EA applications remained constant or increased slightly at Brown, Cornell, and Dartmouth, while dipping slightly at Penn, decreasing more at Columbia, and dropping significantly for Yale. It is unclear just how much of this has been because of Harvard and Princeton’s programs, but we’re willing to wager that it’s more than a little.

The New York Times has a more detailed discussion here, complete with stats.