Skip to main content

A new LGBT strategy for campaign giving.

READ PAM'S POST ON WHY OUR DOLLARS MATTER!!!

For the last few weeks there's been a big to do about the boycotting of the DNC LGBT fundraiser in DC. Prominent gays are calling for an end to throwing wads of cash at the DNC--the gAyTM is closed! I don't want to sound like a prick, but I do got to say its nice to see the community catching up to me! Okay, okay, hold your outrage. I know I'm no trendsetter. For years, however, those of us 'single issue voters'--those of us who primarily pick candidates for their LGBT stances--have been criticized by the community at large who prefer the democrat's wider platform. I admit, there are other issues I think matter as well--fixing health care, fixing schools, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Darfur, AIDS, hunger, mass transportation... etc--and I TEND to be on the Democrat's side on this issue. Not to mention that--even though Gore TOOK Michigan in 2000--I can't TELL you how much GRIEF I got for voting for Nader 9 years ago. OK, OK, noone is going to take down our 2-party monopoly any time soon. The American system seems to only work with two poles. That said, No matter WHAT your central watershed issues are--mine happen to be LGBT rights, I'm selfish, what can I say--I don't think its a bad idea to apply fiscal pressure on 'your party' to walk the walk. The best way to apply that pressure is to STOP GIVING BLINDLY TO THE PARTY ITSELF! Whatever your issues are, there are candidates championing your side of the issue, candidates who want nothing more than to get to Congress, sponsor the bill, and take credit.

I SUGGEST A NEW STRATEGY FOR CAMPAIGN GIVING, and no matter what your issues, you should follow this.
  1. I think that we should grade our candidates harder as far as their stances on our issue--don't give them credit for 'statements made in the affirmative' for us--rather grade them on action. If someone tells a gay rag that they like gays, they should not be getting 100% from the HRC until they are ON RECORD ON CAPITOL HILL either voting for an LGBT bill that comes up or COSPONSORING a bill that hasn't come up yet. Any vote against us should be a MINUS to their score. There are plenty of people that HRC has given the 100% to that have barely lifted a finger in our direction. They only get the 100% for SAYING they'll vote for it when it comes, but since LGBT bills rarely come to a vote, they're safely off record with their constituency. As for non-incumbents who are new to DC and therefore have no record, we should be picker than just taking what they say to the Washington Blade at face value. Unless they're saying it on CNN or better yet FoxNews or the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, their statements just shouldn't count.
  2. Then, when it comes to giving money, give to candidates NOT parties. Find a candidate that fits the bill and give to them. Don't water down your donation toward equality by giving to a party that then trickles that buck down to both pro-equality candidates and ANTI-GAY candidates (there's a few in EVERY party). Make your buck go MUCH further for equality. Don't just pick candidates from a specific party, either. If you got 4 candidates running for one seat, and the Libertarian lady is way more of an LGBT ally than the other three, send a message by giving to her. THEN TELL THE OTHER CANDIDATES WHAT YOU DID AND WHY. Handwritten letters always make it to their desk. Send them a handwritten letter, and you'll make an impression. If the Democrat in your district keeps dumping you, dump him, and he'll start thinking twice... HRC's Slate program is a start, but like I said before I think that they need to start grading harder. After all, I gave to OBAMA through the Slate program, and now look what happened. It would also be nice if there were more candidates in more TYPES of elections ON the Slate. For example, we had some Representatives, some Senators, but noone running for, say, Illinois state Senator. Dig?
  3. Give to the VICTORY FUND! Who could possibly be more pro-LGBT than a GAY, LESBIAN, BISEXUAL or TRANSGENDER candidate herself? The VICTORY FUND helps get US elected. Give to the fund and we'll see things happen!
  4. The criteria for judging our candidates needs to be the Dallas Principles. This is the GREATEST queer manifesto to come out since... well... Queer Manifesto (sorry, Michelangelo Signorile!). All of our candidates and our organizations should SIGN OFF on this before we give them ANY support!

The DNC and the White House has sent the message: "We get it. We are going to fall apart without you. What can we do to fix it?" This is clout. Our dollars matter, and best of all, they know it. We can change the way our parties behave forever--and see more promises come to fruition. We are only 10% of the vote, but our financial and time contributions FAR outweigh the general public. Not to mention we've got amazing allies (we need more!) that will stand with us and turn our 10% voice into 15, 20, 25, 30, 50%+ voice! We need our ALLIES to join in our cries: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Transgender, bisexual, lesbian and gay individuals have been waiting for FAR TOO LONG. Why the HELL do they need to wait anymore for EQUALITY and PEACE? We're going to win this, and we'll win it with our dollars! So go make it happen, folks!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Chris Geidner: In Iowa, judges are ousted.

Via Chris Geidner's Poliglot blog at Metro Weekly:

"

In Iowa, which declared Iowa's marriage ban unconstitutional under the state's constitution in 2009, the National Organization for Marriage got one of its first electoral victories this year. The judicial retention elections appear to have resulted in the replacement of all three justices up for a vote this year.

Here, as of 3:35 a.m. and with 1767 out of 1774 precincts reporting, are the Iowa Secretary of State's election results:

Supreme Court Justice David L. Baker
Yes 443437 45.75%
No 525865 54.25%

Supreme Court Justice Michael J. Streit
Yes 442459 45.6%
No 527921 54.4%

Supreme Court Chief Justice Marsha Ternus
Yes 437118 44.99%
No 534486 55.01%

The court was unanimous in its 2009 ruling that Iowa's constitution required marriage equality."

Can we trust Rasmussen anymore?

HAPPY HOUR... POSTPONED.

Happy Hour Roundup will be coming late today. Fortunately, there is lots of news to report on! Unfortunately, there will be no time for me to collect it and send it. Expect it between 5pm and 6pm!