"You gotta know someone!"

Texark147

Texark147

Proud Mom of a '28 candidate.
Joined
Oct 20, 2022
Messages
805
My DS is a rising senior and in the process of applying to class of '28. He commented the other day that everyone over 40 who finds out that he is applying to the academies comment that he's "gotta know someone high up to get a nomination." This must have been the case back in the day, but it doesn't seem very political these days. Am I wrong about that?
 
My son knew nobody and secured his nomination in 2019.

Is it possible that some people get nominations by knowing someone? Sure. They still have to win their slate.

Your son needs to focus on what he can control - namely putting forth his best package timely.

Sometimes I think some of this can be attributed to people who don’t get nominations making excuses.
 
I bet if you took a poll, here on the forums, 99 pct didn’t ‘know someone’. We didn’t. Two attended.

I think it’s an assumption. Like lots of things. My BIL (retired AF Colonel) brought up ‘making donations’ when we told him about our son applying (we don’t donate to political parties). Both boys still got in.
 
Most people don't know that a decent amount of an MOC's work is non-partisan in nature. Casework and constituent services like nominations are two good examples. Additionally, I think most people assume that the MOC themselves is sitting there agonizing over who gets a nomination. For nominations in particular, it is usually an interview panel and congressional staffers calling balls and strikes with little or no MOC interaction. The MOC is just signing off. So there really is no quid pro quo you could work for nominations.

And to add to the anecdotal evidence, the only time I met the Congressman who nominated me was at the appointee meet and greet/photo op.

Now has there been an instance of political connections leading to a nomination? Probably. However, the SA Admissions and Nominations processes seem very merit-based on an aggregate scale.
 
Texark147 said:
My DS is a rising senior and in the process of applying to class of '28. He commented the other day that everyone over 40 who finds out that he is applying to the academies comment that he's "gotta know someone high up to get a nomination." This must have been the case back in the day, but it doesn't seem very political these days. Am I wrong about that?
Click to expand...
Nominations are nowhere near political these days, they're all application and interview-based. Many MOCs don't have anything to do with the decision and leave it all up to a board of community leaders to make fair and unbiased selections.
 
Some people make stuff up based on hearsay and street myth to sound knowledgeable or can’t resist throwing a bit of a damper on things.

Ignore and press on. Most elected officials have an experienced panel of SA grads and vets who review nom applications, conduct interviews, etc. They don’t know who’s donated money, who knows who, etc. - they just want well-qualified, motivated individuals on the slate. These days, with the internet available to quickly rat people out, and politicians so aware of ethical optics, it would be rare to find it. There may be some vestige left, but it’s not the norm.

I would say the vast majority of candidates who get noms have no connection with any of that, and it’s been like that for some decades now.

I have fun imagining crafting deadpan responses I’d love to say, such as “Yes, it was a little inconvenient to scrape together the expected $50k donation, but that should do the trick.”
 
A1Janitor said:
My son knew nobody and secured his nomination in 2019.

Is it possible that some people get nominations by knowing someone? Sure. They still have to win their slate.

Your son needs to focus on what he can control - namely putting forth his best package timely.

Sometimes I think some of this can be attributed to people who don’t get nominations making excuses.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, he isn't concerned about it at all. He finds it kind of funny. We don't "know anyone high up", so it doesn't really matter anyway. Haha
 
Capt MJ said:
Some people make stuff up based on hearsay and street myth to sound knowledgeable or can’t resist throwing a bit of a damper on things.

Ignore and press on. Most elected officials have an experienced panel of SA grads and vets who review nom applications, conduct interviews, etc. They don’t know who’s donated money, who knows who, etc. - they just want well-qualified, motivated individuals on the slate. These days, with the internet available to quickly rat people out, and politicians so aware of ethical optics, it would be rare to find it. There may be some vestige left, but it’s not the norm.

I would say the vast majority of candidates who get noms have no connection with any of that, and it’s been like that for some decades now.

I have fun imagining crafting deadpan responses I’d love to say, such as “Yes, it was a little inconvenient to scrape together the expected $50k donation, but that should do the trick.”
Click to expand...
He might need to use that line next time someone makes that comment. Lol!

It really kind of takes away from their accomplishments when people think someone is pulling strings for them.
 
Texark147 said:
He might need to use that line next time someone makes that comment. Lol!

It really kind of takes away from their accomplishments when people think someone is pulling strings for them.
Click to expand...
I agree about it taking away from the candidates accomplishments. I got that comment just the other day when I said my ds#2 was applying for nominations. I'm not sure where people get that idea TBH. Sure wasn't that way when I got my nom back in the 90s or when my ds applied 2 years ago. My parents were even registered members of the opposite party of all three of my nom sources.
 
We DID "know" someone and here's how THAT went
.
When I was a freshman in High School back in the 70's, I told my father that I wanted to go to USNA. He
was happy and said, OK, we need to go down to talk to ______ (our congressman) on Saturday morning.
.
Our MOC was a former mayor where we lived and worked out of his local office on Saturday mornings.
My father had been somewhat active politically the decade before and was no stranger to our Rep.
On that fateful Saturday, we were ushered in to the big guy's office and he asked me about my grades
and activities. Then he called out to the outer office and in came his wife who he introduced as his lead person
for Service Academy matters. Mrs. Congressman then took us out to HER desk and asked the same questions
about grades and such and in particular who my teachers were. It turned out that she was a former teacher and
had lots of contacts in the local school systems including mine. She asked that I come back to see her and bring
report cards for her to inspect. I went in every year and around Thanksgiving of my senior year, I came home from
school and my mother said that Mrs. Congressman had called and I needed to be at room one of (address) at
8AM on Saturday. I was there, in a suit and tie and found myself in a large room full of long tables with a few dozen
boys my age and we were all handed Civil Service tests of some sort. It was not too different from the SAT but
nobody had experience with it or prepped for it in any way.
.
I was (and am) a good test taker.
.
Most of my relatives and our family friends probably STILL think that I got my nom because of "connections" but the
truth was and is:

Competition.
.
Even though we DID have a connection, it still came down to performance both long term (report cards and talking to
my teachers) and the Test.
 
Last edited:
So, what if you do know someone?

Say, I grew up in close proximity to a retired Admiral who still holds a lot of leverage with political figures from whom I could receive a nomination. This Admiral supported me in applying to Service Academy X and was willing to "make some calls" on my behalf. It is assumed in our hypothetical world that political figure X would be willing to add my name to the nomination slate based on the Admiral's request. Is it a morally right choice to accept the Admiral's offer to speak with the political figure?

I asked this question to a few people and was told "Use your resources. If that's your resource, then use it to get in". However, thinking about the ideas of discipline, integrity, others above yourself, etc., which candidates are expected to flaunt their strength through essays and interviews. does "knowing someone" and using that to get in compromise the values presented in one's application?

Just a hypothetical situation that I pondered each time I was asked "who I knew" to receive a nom.
 
Hypothetically, I hope whatever hypothetical applicant lands on a slate of up to ten nominees through the hypothetical willingness of a retired flag officer to try to influence an outcome with a hypothetical political official willing to sacrifice a fair process, still has enough integrity left to wonder what hypothetically and quite possibly extremely well-qualified candidate got left off the slate of 10 names to accommodate an under-the-table request. Now, if letters of recommendation are allowed, and the admiral wanted to attest he or she had personally seen the candidate walk on water, that’s perfectly fine.

The hypothetical candidate still has to be deemed fully qualified by the SA.

It is good to ponder these things, rather than just write about them in essays, and try to live accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Sealion II said:
If your icon is accurate, it must have been an epic disco suit. :)
Click to expand...
That event was before the dawn of disco.
My icon is my class crest. For What It's Worth, during my 2/C and 1/C years at USNA, there were at least some
Saturday nights where Dahlgren Hall was not just used as an Ice Skating and Hockey rink but also for
"Disco Dahlgren" . . .
 
When I was growing up, I remember people saying that you need to know the congressman or senator to get a nomination. They suggested volunteering to help with a political campaign (or donating money). I think people said that because they heard everyone else say that, not because it was true.

However, some areas have “Academy Day” events each year for high school (or younger) students to attend to receive information about the academies and how to prepare for the application process. Some members of the nominating committees attend those events. It is possible to meet them and get to know them a little bit. This could potentially help during the interview process, if some committee members remember meeting the candidate from past Academy Day events. It might help to demonstrate interest in the academy over a period of years by attending those events, as opposed to the candidates who don’t become interested in applying until later in the process such as summer before senior year. Or if you or your family happen to personally know someone on the nominating committee, that could possibly give you a leg up on the other candidates.

So perhaps some candidates are helped if they “know someone,” though I think the “someone” is not the congressman or senator.

My son did not know anyone, but he received a nomination from his congressman.

Edited to say:
I think the best chance of getting a nomination is to make your application very strong in every area they are evaluating:
Academics, Athletics, Leadership, Service are the big categories that come to mind.
 
Last edited:
The reverse is also true. One of the committee members for my son was a former city corporation counsel that I sued while he represented the city. We won. ;)

It made me a little nervous. He was a former JAG. I had nothing to be nervous about. My experience is the committee members are honest and honorable, and know their job is to present the 10 best candidates according to their criteria.
 
A1Janitor said:
The reverse is also true. One of the committee members for my son was a former city corporation counsel that I sued while he represented the city. We won. ;)

It made me a little nervous. He was a former JAG. I had nothing to be nervous about. My experience is the committee members are honest and honorable, and know their job is to present the 10 best candidates according to their criteria.
Click to expand...
Lolllol I was thinking ‘it may not necessarily be a GOOD thing to have recognition’ 🤣🤣

Seriously, banking on ‘maybe, perhaps, could, possibly’ are teeny tiny little grains of hope. Instead, put your energies into your resume. Your ‘sure things’. Your controllables.

Perhaps there are so many layers of the appointment process, that having a perceived advantage in any one sub-layer, isn’t an advantage at all. IF a candidate made it to the appointment level, with a sub-par resume and WCS, and a ‘you have to know someone,’ perhaps it could also be a disadvantage…

I have to believe that the many hoops that one has to go through, combined with WCS, ‘3Q’, and the admissions/boarded/nom panels at a SA level, would negate any ‘hypothetical’ admiral (or anyone else’s) endorsement.

Does/has it happened? Perhaps yes. Perhaps no. But it’s not a strategy worth putting any effort or thought into. Bc it simply isn’t prevalent or impactful on a class. It can’t be as there are too many layers involved.

Control your controllables. And everyone has advantages and strengths in their resume that others don’t. Do YOUR best, with YOUR best resume.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me some of our regular posters here who sit on these elected official nom review committees have noted they often recuse themselves in certain situations where they know or work with the candidate in another capacity.

I think the Academy info sessions are good things to attend, information-wise. People often forget the word “impression” can go two ways, positive or negative, and that the hubris-oozing candidate-to-be with overbearing parents impresses people as memorably as the respectful, courteous candidate grateful for the opportunity to learn more about the process.
 
justdoit19 said:
Lolllol I was thinking ‘it may not necessarily be a GOOD thing to have recognition’ 🤣🤣

Seriously, banking on ‘maybe, perhaps, could, possibly’ are teeny tiny little grains of hope. Instead, put your energies into your resume. Your ‘sure things’. Your controllables.

Perhaps there are so many layers of the appointment process, that having a perceived advantage in any one sub-layer, isn’t an advantage at all. IF a candidate made it to the appointment level, with a sub-par resume and WCS, and a ‘you have to know someone,’ perhaps it could also be a disadvantage…

I have to believe that the many hoops that one has to go through, combined with WCS, ‘3Q’, and the admissions/boarded/nom panels at a SA level, would negate any ‘hypothetical’ admiral (or anyone else’s) endorsement.

Does/has it happened? Perhaps yes. Perhaps no. But it’s not a strategy worth putting any effort or thought into. Bc it simply isn’t prevalent or impactful on a class. It can’t be as there are too many layers involved.

Control your controllables. And everyone has advantages and strengths in their resume that others don’t. Do YOUR best, with YOUR best resume.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, we don't "know anyone" and have no plans to find someone. Lol. We found it comical that so many people think you have to know someone to get an appointment.
 
Texark147 said:
Just to be clear, we don't "know anyone" and have no plans to find someone. Lol. We found it comical that so many people think you have to know someone to get an appointment.
Click to expand...
Be impressed that so many actually know what a SA is! See threads ‘your son or daughter is going where??’, rounds one and two, for our personal experience 😆
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top