“In 2008, I was one of those who voted for Obama, financially supported his campaign, emailed family and friends advocating for him, and bought and displayed campaign signage, bumper stickers, etc. I will vote for Obama again, but I won't be doing any of the other stuff. I am one of those who is disillusioned by Obama's not being progressive enough. What percentage of Obama's supporters are disillusioned, like I am?”
OldMacdonald on Mar 2, 2012 at 13:48:27
“The reality is he needs to have people work with him. Keep up the fight and stay strong. He said it would be tough. Man up.”
Oct 10, 2013 at 16:45:04
“Assuming charitable giving has remained relatively constant at 2% of GDP for several decades now, what does that suggest about the impact of professional fundraising and the virtues of following a "for profit" "business" model?
In my personal experience, my level of giving as a percentage of income has held relatively constant at around 5% for many, many years now. It was around 5% years ago, when I received far fewer mail and telephone solicitations and far fewer "gifts" from charities seeking my donations. It is around 5% today, when charitable solicitations -- by mail and phone -- have reached annoying levels.
If all of the greatly increased fundraising efforts -- and expenditures -- that have occurred over the past few decades were actually effective, why would charitable giving remain stuck at around 2% of GDP? It is important to note that it is "total giving" that has remained stuck at 2% of GDP, not "net after overhead."
So, does all of the increased overhead and fundraising activity have no impact? Realistically, the answer it likely "No." Then what is the impact? Could it be that charities with greater overhead and fundraising expenses are siphoning funds away from those with less overhead and less fundraising expenses? Could it be that, as a result of the apparent surge in overhead and fundraising expenses, the net to charitable programs -- as a percentage of GDP -- has actually declined over the past few decades? Unfortunately, that is the likely implication.”
“The problem with your analysis is that many of us are being asked to vote for "Democrats" who are virtually indistinguishable from Republicans on many important questions. I will vote. I have never failed to. But, I will also abstain in those races where the purported Democrat candidate hasn't acted like one when it mattered.
I have already emailed two "Democrats" running for election where I live and explained exactly why they will not be receiving my financial support or my vote. For me the turning point came when both announced they were for extending the tax cuts for the wealthy. I told them that alone was enough to lose my vote.
Sooner or later, things will get bad enough that candidates worthy of our vote will emerge. For now, where I live, we aren't there yet.”