NewsMarch 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

The UA: Campaign In The Neck

What Republican primaries? Ha! The UA election is back, and we know you just can’t get enough of that student government ish. By now, you’ve probably gotten the self-promotional e-mails, but in case you haven’t, we’ve got you covered like a tree post during this election season.

Dan Bernick C’14 and Jake Shuster C’13 are your candidates for UA President, and the two have already swung their campaigns into a super speedy start. The Money Booster’s got an informative website—embellished with many profile-worthy pictures—as well as a spiffy Facebook page where you can “like” all said pictures. The sophomore hopeful, on the other hand, has released his own website, drawing a thick line in the sand between WordPress and Tumblr fans, and this 45-second clip. Let the games begin.

Who do you think you'll be voting for this election season?

View Results

34 People have left comments on this post


By Penn Junior on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Who’s running their campaigns?

By Dino on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Dear me. I’d vote for anyone besides Shuster the Scandal Booster, but the other guy makes it hard with so little experience and campaigning for “better dining options”. Not hard enough though, but close.

By lolol on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

can we get these bylines on the actual ballot?

By Vote Jake on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Having worked with both Jake and Dan I fully support JAKE SHUSTER for UA President!!! He is so much more accomplished, really hard working, smart and the perfect guy for the job. He has a strong track record and his vision for the UA is much more feasible and practical. He definitely has my vote

By VOTE DAN on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Having worked with both Jake and Dan I fully support DAN BERNICK for UA President!!! He is so much more accomplished, really hard working, smart and the perfect guy for the job. He has a strong track record and his vision for the UA is much more feasible and practical. He definitely has my vote

By VOTE NOT JAKE on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Having worked with both Jake and Not Jake I fully support NOT JAKE for UA President!!! He is so much more accomplished, really hard working, smart and the perfect guy for the job. He has a strong track record and his vision for the UA is much more feasible and practical. He definitely has my vote

By the only thing on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

the only thing that could get me to vote for jake shuster is sheer curiosity for what kind of scandal he plans to have during the grand finale that will be his senior year. seriously, it’s like one thing after another with him.

By Tough Choice on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

jake obviously has more experience, but not sure if that is good or bad? Dan seems to not like the UA, but not sure if that is good or bad?

By Skew on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

I wonder how much skew this poll will get just by the fact that Jake is the first choice

By @Tough Choice on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

I think Jake has more experience but that experience is more cause for concern than reassurance. Seeing how he’s used his time on the UA in the past (scandals and what one generally has to do to cause them), I’d rather not have him at the head of the organization. He’s done a lot of good work but it’s overshadowed by the problems he’s caused. If he were running for VP or a general UA position I’d support him because of the work he’s done, but someone with that record of scandal should not be at the head of the organization.

Dan doesn’t seem to like the way the UA is now. The problem is, he’s held leadership roles within the UA and has actually been fairly prominent this past year. The question is then why he hasn’t already changed all of the things he says he will change if he’s been a committee director for an entire year. In fairness, I haven’t seen his name attached to any of the student government scandals so that could be a large part of what bothers him.

I think it’s a tough call too but I’m going with Dan on this one.

By DAN the MAN on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

So, I’ve never met anyone with more passion to serve on the UA. I understand that the UA has had its ups and downs this year (mostly downs), but Dan seems genuinely interested in turning it into an organization that makes the DP for more than just Hazing allegations and announcing their new budget plans. I want to see my student government be more active, and Dan has the potential to do so. I’m voting for a candidate with a vision… not just one with a snarky nickname, a reputation for antics, and a fraternity with a questionable past. VOTE DAN.

By dan on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

is the most difficult to person work with. I will not consign the poor new exec to dealing with him.

By We Want Change on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

dan is by far the most approachable and active member of the ua. kid’s seriously not doing this for his ego, he loves penn and really wants it to be great!

By Dan's fan on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

I now play on the Penn Park tennis courts for free because of Dan Bernick. True story.

By VOTE JAKE! on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

The only “scandal” Jake was involved in is so commonplace at Penn that it seems rather hypocritical to even consider it a scandal. Jake’s a charismatic, friendly, qualified, intelligent person who deserves to be president of the UA.

Also, people actually know who Jake is… who is Dan Bernick?

By vote dan on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

If I wanted skulls to be protected in case they need another bailout I would vote Jake, but I don’t.

By victor stagnetti on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

so if I get what everybody is saying… I should keep doing what I’ve been doing and just not vote? I’d hate to be choosing between a giant douche and a turd sandwich without even knowing.

By Shammut Smith C'13 on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

I’m voting for Shuster. Love me some hazing of the UA freshmen.

By Vote Jake! on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

The scandal isn’t just that he was leading the hazing efforts. It’s that he was doing it while the UA was amending the alcohol policy and then he (and the rest of the UA executive board) refused to stop working on the policy while they were being investigated and then found guilty. Dan was not only uninvolved in the hazing, but he also decided to stop trying to reform student conduct policies during this time because he recognized that pushing ahead wasn’t the right thing to do. To me, that just speaks volumes about his character.

And if you want to talk about scandals let’s not forget this little gem: http://www.ivygateblog.com/2010/03/penn-student-council-candidate-sends-out-astoundingly-doofy-email/

Or this one: http://www.ivygateblog.com/2010/03/this-will-be-our-last-post-on-the-penn-2013-elections-probably-shuster-walloped-by-purposeful-late-endorsements/

Jake is just someone who really doesn’t play fair or act like a good person. He’s conniving and the UA needs someone with a strong moral fiber. Dan Bernick has all of that, plus the experience on being on the UA’s cabinet for an entire year.

By christina on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Dan is extremely hard-working and really thinks big picture in regards to how to improve UA and Penn. He is so passionate and focused! Even if you think Dan and Jake both have their flaws , Dan is by far the lesser of two evils. I’ll be voting Dan Bernick for UA President.

By smith on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

bernick4prez gets extra points for his snazzy campaign slogan. crazy right?!

By DAN FOR UA PRES on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Dan is absolutely the only candidate for this job. From what I’ve heard about the two candidates, Dan is the only one with ideas for tangible change that will turn the UA into the respectable organization it should be. He’s passionate, driven, and absolutely qualified for the position. Let Dan use his drive empower the UA to make it into the organization we all know it can be.

I’ve never been so angry as when I read about the UA hazing scandal and it was JAKE’S name attached to the scandal (quotes and all!) discussing the essentiality for the UA to continue with it’s efforts to revise an alcohol policy it was so flagrantly violating. Plus, it’s no mistake that Skulls got off so easy with someone dying in their house. If you want a year of hypocrisy and the use of an office to self-serve one’s ego and personal needs… really more of the same… then Jake is the man for the job.

By UAster on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

dan’s the man! jake’s a flake!

By Anyone but Jake on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Jake is a terrible candidate..I’d never vote for him.

By Unfortunate Fact on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Saddest of all, since student government accomplishes almost nothing of significance, it tends to attract people in need of an ego trip. The former candidate is the epitome of this. The UA has become an organization attractive to those elitist few whose name recognition placed them in a position to represent the view of the masses. Unfortunately, this means that the former will most likely win, because his reach extends much further because of his scandals, as well as other publicity stunts he has up his sleeve. Simply put, the UA is maladjusted and repellent to the talented or competent. Sorry Dan.

There is clearly a serious discrepancy between the actual practices of student government and stated purposes of student government. Actual practice that Jake will be elected, and that Dan should be elected.

By WE LOVE DAN! on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Who would have thought that Jake Shuster would have a chance in this election. Crazy, right?

By Jon Monfred on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Anonymous posts have no credibility. Either shut up or stand up and substantiate your comments.

The UA gets to throw around $2 million dollars of YOUR MONEY. Whether you participate in 47 clubs or focus on just your own group, team or house, the UA’s actions and inactions impact student life, regardless of your opinion on how effective or ineffective we are.

Learn about each candidate on their websites. Decide who best reflects your interests and who will get the job done based on prior experience and past results.

When you finish making fun of student government kids (we usually deserve it), go vote at http://www.PennStudGov.com.

Having made a true impact on Penn, go cry about the sad state of American democracy.

By Alec Miller on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

As a follow up to Jon Monfred’s comments.

There have been complaints about Geoffrey Canada as the commencement speaker. The speaker is selected by the University Council Committee on Honorary Degrees. The Nominations & Elections Committee (1 of the 6 branches of student government) places 2 undergraduates on that committee each Spring for an academic year. If you are interested in applying for this committee or any others, please email me at alecmil@wharton.upenn.edu and I will be sure to remind you when applications open up later this semester.

By Charlie Sheen on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

You used the word “ish.”
That’s almost as bad as #this.

#why

Otherwise I still think you’re the greatest. XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX.

By @Jon Monfred on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

“Anonymous posts have no credibility. Either shut up or stand up and substantiate your comments.”

“go cry about the sad state of American democracy.”

Perhaps, its because communications is a topic ive studied here as a major, but I’m a little taken back by this part of the comment. This may be the worst comment of all. This is the type of attitude is the reason the world is such a bitter and messed up place. Mocking others voicing their opinions and creating inequality between them is an outrage. This comment is both reprehensible and offensive, and its a disgrace for what it means to have freedom of speech. Worst of all, there is no regard for other people’s thoughts or feelings. I’m not only offended for myself but for anyone who has to read this comment. To the commenter, I could not imagine that these were your intentions, but please have some respect and dignity towards others in what you are saying especially when you make yourself a public figure.

people are simply scared to be ridiculed for their thoughts and opinions. The irony lies is that this comment makes everyone want to be anonymous. perhaps if we stopped ridiculing each other, people would come out from the dark. however, im not ready to receive a reaction from someone who believes they are both cognitively and morally superior than everyone else, or someone who thinks that anyone who doesnt think like them is irrational. next on the list is name calling.

By @Alec Miller on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Why are there even six branches of student government? This is horrendously inefficient. The US, Pennsylvania, any state, pretty much any REAL government doesn’t have six branches.

The NEC is this club for the power-hungry but insecure to be able to accrue considerable influence without ever facing the undergraduate electorate. Shouldn’t the ELECTED representatives be the ones recommending undergraduates for important positions? Or shouldn’t people just run for them?

The UA is the popularly elected branch but actually doesn’t have much to do, so everyone get’s disinterested and elections devolve into these petty scandals where attention-seeking egotists run and try to become the best known name on campus.

SCUE does… what? I guess the UA could do it.

SAC has a purposes, but the SAC exec, which isn’t really elected openly, takes all the power away from the actual “general body” of SAC, and they can do that since they actually do have a fair bit of power.

Class Boards just waste money on giveaways trying to get their years to like them, and while I guess they are kind of important, everyone always runs uncontested. Maybe caucuses of UA reps from each year should make all the decisions.

SPEC? That’s the sixth? It’s people who want free Fling tickets. Replace the people who actually run it with a council of five-to-seven elected representatives, who elect amongst themselves a chair, and report to the UA President.

This division of power is futile.

By anon on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

@@JONMONFRED

Boring comment. make it shorter

By @anon (aka Jon Monfred) on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

So let me see if I get what’s going on here. Jon Monfred first posts telling everyone to use their name in a comment that mocks those who disagree with him (and is seen as really offensive) and then, when he gets called out on what he said, posts again as “anon,” refusing to put his name on his response as he continues to mock comments that disagree with him.

You’d think it wasn’t possible, but Johnny boy managed to outdo his first post.

By Steve on March 19, 2012 at 2:15 pm

does this work?

Post a Comment