S.U.R.E. candidates react to Dahle’s note

It was a relatively uneventful day in Encino when members of the
Students United for Reform and Equality slate gathered to discuss
their platform for the upcoming undergraduate student
government’s spring elections.

At that time, Undergraduate Students Association Council
President and slate leader David Dahle introduced what would become
a controversial campaign document.

More than a dozen S.U.R.E. candidates bonded over a sandwich
lunch, games of pool and a discussion on the slate’s
fundamentals at Budget Review Committee Director Justin
Levi’s house on April 5. They did not foresee what would
happen when Dahle’s document was unwittingly released last
week.

Thinking back on that day, slate members now recall that even
weeks before Dahle’s memo went public, most of them did not
take it too seriously and had made the decision not to embrace it
extensively in their campaigns this spring.

Along with a history of the slate and rules for candidates to
abide by, Dahle’s paper includes a “friends and
enemies” list as well as a “Keys to Success”
section, in which the first point is “manipulation is the
key.”

Dahle had written the document over spring break and sent it to
the slate’s candidates prior to the gathering. He had said he
intended to help introduce candidates to the S.U.R.E. slate and
USAC politics.

The note was distributed along with the Kerckhoff Doctrine
““ a document that outlines the slate’s vision, said
General Representative Adam Harmetz, who plans to run for president
under the S.U.R.E slate.

“(Dahle’s document) should be taken in
context,” Harmetz said.

It was discussed along with the Kerckhoff Doctrine and
S.U.R.E.’s platform, he said.

The candidates interpreted the memo only as Dahle’s
perspective after campaigning for the past two years, said Gideon
Baum, Dahle’s chief of staff and S.U.R.E.’s projected
internal vice president candidate.

Baum added that only about 15-30 minutes were spent in
discussing the document.

After looking it over quickly, it was thrown aside, and the
discussion moved on, Baum said.

Members of the slate expressed mixed reactions to the
document.

“Some people laughed at it and all of us agreed that we
weren’t going to follow the manipulation part,” Levi
said. “(That part) wasn’t necessary and (is) not the
way we operate.”

Though some people laughed it off, other candidates expressed
more concern.

“I have to admit, it troubled me a little bit …
especially the friends and enemies list,” Baum said.

Fellow S.U.R.E. candidate Christine Sol, who will run for
academic affairs commissioner, said she shared the concern.

“I wasn’t sure how to take it. I am good friends
with some people (on the enemy list), and I will not consider it in
my campaign,” Sol said.

Dahle had said he had been metaphorically speaking when making
the list.

“Though David meant it as a metaphor, I don’t view
these people as my foes,” Baum said.

Some also had trouble with the use of the term
“manipulation.”

“When I hear “˜manipulation,’ I think of old
men with cigars thinking about how to control people’s lives,
like in “˜Godfather,'” Baum said.

But Baum added he thought Dahle meant
“˜persuasion.’

Still, the document won’t play a big role in
S.U.R.E.’s election campaign this year, Harmetz said.

Candidates can look at it, process it and throw it out if they
don’t like it, he said.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *