6 ms·

I decided that other people are far more organized than I am and can respond more effectively, so I'm outsourcing political action in the form of donations. I'v

I decided that other people are far more organized than I am and can respond more effectively, so I'm outsourcing political action in the form of donations. I've earmarked 3% of my income every month for a list of selected charities that currently includes the ACLU, the HRC, and a short list of smaller ones. I encourage you to do the same!

returningfory2 2y ago
Edit: decided I don't want to engage on this issue.
- padolsey 2y ago
  > Edit: decided I don't want to engage on this issue. I think I want that on my headstone :p
palmotea 2y ago
> I've earmarked 3% of my income every month for a list of selected charities that currently includes the ACLU, the HRC, and a short list of smaller ones. I don't think that's a good investment, considering how badly those organizations failed in order to bring us to today.
- andy_ppp 2y ago
  How did these organisations make people vote for Donald Trump?
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    Not OP, but to me, these are organizations that are meant for a world where laws matter. They spent the four years of the Biden administration acting like a hall monitor telling other students they can't smoke in the boys' room. Like, not only can they smoke in the boys' room, they have done so repeatedly. They have upgraded from clove cigarettes to tobacco to weed to crack. The current oligarchs of the US got there by having no shame and by not caring about the rules, because ultimately, they're just words on paper unless someone uses force (through the state's monopoly on it) to make them a reality.
  - returningfory2 2y ago
    By successfully pressuring Democratic politicians like Kamala Harris to publicly adopt progressive positions that are unpopular, but highly favored by the kind of people who donate to and operate organizations like the ACLU. For example, the (unfortunately very successful) Trump ad “Harris is for they/them, Trump is for you” ultimately originates with the ACLU. In 2019 they successfully got Harris to pledge government funding for gender affirming care for people in e.g. immigration detention [1]. It is totally insane that the ACLU thought it was important and worthwhile to get a pledge on this edge case. In general this advocacy was way out of touch with the country at large, has totally backfired, and now landed us with an anti-trans administration. [1] question 14 here https://www.aclu.org/documents/aclu-rights-for-all-candidate-questionnaire-2019 https://www.aclu.org/documents/aclu-rights-for-all-candidate...
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      In 2019? That was before 2020, and that election resulted in Harris being vice president.
      - returningfory2 2y ago
        Is your claim seriously that Kamala Harris's image on cultural issues like trans rights did not harm her election campaign? One of Trump's most successful campaign ads was the one that included her talking about government-funded gender affirming care for people in prison. It even has its own Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them). The fact that this stuff started in 2019 that she won as VP in 2020 is irrelevant; it _clearly_ was an issue in the 2024 that hurt her. But that's just one example of many. There's also, say, Biden's handling of the border. Even though in 2022 it was clearly deeply unpopular and playing right into Trump's reelection campaign, he didn't change course (until too late) because of pressure from groups like the ACLU. Overall, IMO one of the biggest factors in Trump's reelection is that the left and the center-left _talked_ about Trump being a big problem, but were unwilling to actually alter their policies or behavior or messaging to broaden their appeal and ensure Trump lost.
  - palmotea 2y ago
    > How did these organisations make people vote for Donald Trump? It's not so much that they made people vote for Trump, but that they utterly failed to rise to the occasion, despite screaming how the stakes were so high. I really think a lot of the so-called opposition saw Trump as a wedge to selfishly drive support towards their little ideological or personal priorities. I think the way forward is probably to ditch finger-wagging liberal technocracy and go for a more competent, law-abiding populism, which seeks to strike a compromise that can comfortably get super-majority support (i.e. 60%+ rather than 50%+1) and speak effectively to many of the anxieties Trump harnesses. You're not going to get that by giving to special interest activist organizations.
- LeoPanthera 2y ago
  I am happy to learn about better alternatives.
  - lukas099 2y ago
    Democracy Forward has brought many of the lawsuits against the president’s executive overreach IIRC. Democracy Docket has had a lot of success protecting voting rights.
    - LeoPanthera 2y ago
      I am happy to say that Democracy Forward was already on my list.
    - pavel_lishin 2y ago
      Donated.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- whoknowsidont 2y ago
  >considering how badly those organizations failed in order to bring us to today. They don't have that much money.
yostrovs 2y ago
[flagged]
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  Depends on his funds. if they are in a tight spot, 3% is more than 0%. if they are wealthy, that 3% will go father than many people's 10%.
- kbelder 2y ago
  One of the very best things you could do for your cause is to tone down your rhetoric. You're driving far more people away than you're convincing of anything. There's no shortage of things to criticize Trump for that are clear and hard to argue against. What you're saying is only fuel for the extreme to become more extreme.
  - yostrovs 2y ago
    Sorry, my sarcasm got a bit too far.
  - BadCookie 2y ago
    I think yostrovs was talking about Musk, not Trump. And calling someone who did two Nazi salutes in front of a crowd “Hitler” is maybe not as unfair as you are making it out to be. My guess is that Musk did it for outrage purposes rather than because he is an actual Nazi, but it’s hard to know really. Video in case you somehow have not seen the incident I am referring to: https://youtu.be/gDkuwRx14hQ https://youtu.be/gDkuwRx14hQ
    - yostrovs 2y ago
      Why would the video you shared take out the words "from my heart" that were said just before the gesture? Would that maybe change the meaning of the gesture? This is the problem with MSM that makes you actually think you're dealing with Hitler.
      - 2y ago

returningfory2 2y ago

Edit: decided I don't want to engage on this issue.

padolsey 2y ago
> Edit: decided I don't want to engage on this issue. I think I want that on my headstone :p

palmotea 2y ago

> I've earmarked 3% of my income every month for a list of selected charities that currently includes the ACLU, the HRC, and a short list of smaller ones. I don't think that's a good investment, considering how badly those organizations failed in order to bring us to today.

andy_ppp 2y ago
How did these organisations make people vote for Donald Trump?
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  Not OP, but to me, these are organizations that are meant for a world where laws matter. They spent the four years of the Biden administration acting like a hall monitor telling other students they can't smoke in the boys' room. Like, not only can they smoke in the boys' room, they have done so repeatedly. They have upgraded from clove cigarettes to tobacco to weed to crack. The current oligarchs of the US got there by having no shame and by not caring about the rules, because ultimately, they're just words on paper unless someone uses force (through the state's monopoly on it) to make them a reality.
- returningfory2 2y ago
  By successfully pressuring Democratic politicians like Kamala Harris to publicly adopt progressive positions that are unpopular, but highly favored by the kind of people who donate to and operate organizations like the ACLU. For example, the (unfortunately very successful) Trump ad “Harris is for they/them, Trump is for you” ultimately originates with the ACLU. In 2019 they successfully got Harris to pledge government funding for gender affirming care for people in e.g. immigration detention [1]. It is totally insane that the ACLU thought it was important and worthwhile to get a pledge on this edge case. In general this advocacy was way out of touch with the country at large, has totally backfired, and now landed us with an anti-trans administration. [1] question 14 here https://www.aclu.org/documents/aclu-rights-for-all-candidate-questionnaire-2019 https://www.aclu.org/documents/aclu-rights-for-all-candidate...
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    In 2019? That was before 2020, and that election resulted in Harris being vice president.
    - returningfory2 2y ago
      Is your claim seriously that Kamala Harris's image on cultural issues like trans rights did not harm her election campaign? One of Trump's most successful campaign ads was the one that included her talking about government-funded gender affirming care for people in prison. It even has its own Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them). The fact that this stuff started in 2019 that she won as VP in 2020 is irrelevant; it _clearly_ was an issue in the 2024 that hurt her. But that's just one example of many. There's also, say, Biden's handling of the border. Even though in 2022 it was clearly deeply unpopular and playing right into Trump's reelection campaign, he didn't change course (until too late) because of pressure from groups like the ACLU. Overall, IMO one of the biggest factors in Trump's reelection is that the left and the center-left _talked_ about Trump being a big problem, but were unwilling to actually alter their policies or behavior or messaging to broaden their appeal and ensure Trump lost.
- palmotea 2y ago
  > How did these organisations make people vote for Donald Trump? It's not so much that they made people vote for Trump, but that they utterly failed to rise to the occasion, despite screaming how the stakes were so high. I really think a lot of the so-called opposition saw Trump as a wedge to selfishly drive support towards their little ideological or personal priorities. I think the way forward is probably to ditch finger-wagging liberal technocracy and go for a more competent, law-abiding populism, which seeks to strike a compromise that can comfortably get super-majority support (i.e. 60%+ rather than 50%+1) and speak effectively to many of the anxieties Trump harnesses. You're not going to get that by giving to special interest activist organizations.
LeoPanthera 2y ago
I am happy to learn about better alternatives.
- lukas099 2y ago
  Democracy Forward has brought many of the lawsuits against the president’s executive overreach IIRC. Democracy Docket has had a lot of success protecting voting rights.
  - LeoPanthera 2y ago
    I am happy to say that Democracy Forward was already on my list.
  - pavel_lishin 2y ago
    Donated.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
whoknowsidont 2y ago
>considering how badly those organizations failed in order to bring us to today. They don't have that much money.

yostrovs 2y ago

[flagged]

johnnyanmac 2y ago
Depends on his funds. if they are in a tight spot, 3% is more than 0%. if they are wealthy, that 3% will go father than many people's 10%.
kbelder 2y ago
One of the very best things you could do for your cause is to tone down your rhetoric. You're driving far more people away than you're convincing of anything. There's no shortage of things to criticize Trump for that are clear and hard to argue against. What you're saying is only fuel for the extreme to become more extreme.
- yostrovs 2y ago
  Sorry, my sarcasm got a bit too far.
- BadCookie 2y ago
  I think yostrovs was talking about Musk, not Trump. And calling someone who did two Nazi salutes in front of a crowd “Hitler” is maybe not as unfair as you are making it out to be. My guess is that Musk did it for outrage purposes rather than because he is an actual Nazi, but it’s hard to know really. Video in case you somehow have not seen the incident I am referring to: https://youtu.be/gDkuwRx14hQ https://youtu.be/gDkuwRx14hQ
  - yostrovs 2y ago
    Why would the video you shared take out the words "from my heart" that were said just before the gesture? Would that maybe change the meaning of the gesture? This is the problem with MSM that makes you actually think you're dealing with Hitler.
    - 2y ago