Tag: campaign finance

Yep. You’re getting two Leftist Lexicon entries this week. You’re welcome. Or I’m sorry. You know, whichever.

If you’ve been paying attention lately (and if you have, I’m sorry), there’s been a bit of an uptick in protests lately. And in some cases, these protests have resulted in property damage, particularly to Tesla owners, dealerships, and even charging stations. Good thing Leftists haven’t made electric vehicles a major part of their future endeavors…oh, wait.

Anyway, there’s a name that’s been bandied about as being behind these temper-tantrums…I mean protests, and that name is ActBlue. Anyone who’s followed politics in recent years has probably heard of them in one fashion or another But are they getting into funding protests, if they haven’t been involved previously? Let’s find out. Time to break out your SCUBA gear so we can do a deep dive.

And don’t worry. Your diving suit doesn’t make you look fat.

ActBlue

What the Left thinks it means – a valuable PAC that supports Democrat policies and politicians

What it really means – another way for Leftists to fuck up the country

Aside from being a pain in the ass, ActBlue is a non-profit organization that is a hybrid of PACs, which allows it to make payments to individual candidates’ committees as well as independent expenditures. Our good friends at OpenSecrets give a better description in their glossary under “Carey Committee.” To put it mildly, it’s basically playing both sides of the game because the rules surrounding PACs are fucking stupid.

Anyway, ActBlue’s purpose is to help Leftists raise money for causes or candidates they like. Of course, they’re not affiliated with any specific candidate due to the aforementioned PAC rules, but given their giving seems to be particularly one-sided, it’s a sure bet they aren’t going to be throwing money to anyone to the right of the Socialist Socialite.

In and of itself, that’s not a reason to rag on ActBlue. You can swing a dead cat in Washington, DC, and hit at least a dozen people either getting PAC money or lobbying on behalf of a PAC who wants to give their money to a candidate or cause. Of course, you might want to check DC laws about swinging dead cats before you try it. Under advice from my lawyers, that’s all I’m allowed to say at the moment.

This is where the other part of the PAC Frankenstein monster comes into play. Although they can’t endorse a candidate, they can still advocate for different causes. You know, like posting bail for George Floyd protestors in Minnesota. You remember the George Floyd protests, right? All the looting, fires, and general mayhem. I know Gwen Walz has fond memories of that time, but most of the rest of us aren’t fucking insane. Because the funding was for a cause, ActBlue was able to skirt any legal issues, or if they weren’t nobody bothered to bring them up on charges.

That is until recently. ActBlue has found itself in the metaphorical crosshairs (in Minecraft) of Republicans due to some minor little hiccups with their credit card donations. You know, a minor little thing like accepting donations without proper verification, which could open the door to fraud, accepting foreign donations for American elections, and…I shudder to think of it…funding another Nickelback album.

To my Canadian readers, replace “Nickelback” with “Lizzo.”

This concern was shared by others outside of Republican circles because of the implications, so it wasn’t just a conservative talking point. But the fact this fundraising organization would let such a huge security risk go by without so much as a sideways glance would raise some red (or in this case blue) flags.

Then, there’s the whole bail thing, I referenced earlier.

Recently, ActBlue has been in the news for not the best of reasons. For example, several senior executives resigned in the span of a couple of weeks, throwing the organization into turmoil. In fact, that’s exactly how the New York Times termed it, and if they’re calling it out, you know it’s gotta be a complete flaming shitshow! And there’s nothing that instills more confidence that an organization is to have a lot of long-time and high profile figures disappear in a cartoon cloud of dust.

Now, ActBlue and it’s charity arm are being accused of funding organizations linked to terror groups and I’m not talking about “The Squad.” With the aforementioned security issues, ActBlue has a major headache on its hands.

And now ActBlue is being implicated in a recent rash of attacks on Tesla products. Elon Musk alleged five ActBlue funded groups are responsible for these attacks, resulting in vandalism and property damage. So far, it’s just an accusation at this point, so for legal purposes I can’t say they’re guilty and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law to the point it would make the lawfare waged against Donald Trump look like traffic court.

Did I say that out loud? Sorry. Please don’t sue me.

As much as I enjoy watching ActBlue get the kabob treatment, a lot of the damage has already been done. By using the law to their advantage and skirting security measures, it has been a Leftist fundraising juggernaut, helping to advance causes and politicians that hurt this country. So, good job, kids!

To be fair, ActBlue is doing what other PACs are doing or may be doing, which is damnation enough as it is. Personally, I don’t care if you’re raising money for Leftist causes or Rightist causes because 1) it’s their rights as Americans, and 2) I’m not donating to them because 3) I’m too damn poor. Where I draw the line is when you’re dealing in shady shit to accomplish your goals. And from the research I’ve done, I get a pretty good feeling ActBlue is shadier than an albino’s favorite outdoor spot.

Yet, the existence of ActBlue calls into question the Left’s calls to curtail “dark money” and big money in general in politics. ActBlue has raised billions of dollars for Leftist causes, so they have a vested interest in keeping them around. On the other hand, Leftists like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth “Chief Running Mouth” Warren brag about how they’re funded by the “little guy,” not the big money donors. (Unless you count Big Pharma, of course.) So, which is it? Do you want to get the money out of politics or do you want to continue with the way things are?

My money is on a third option: allowing money in politics, but only for Leftists.

Regardless, ActBlue has been effective, but may be done in by sloppy security measures. If so, it will be replaced by something or someone else so the cash can keep flowing because that’s the way the grift continues. Kinda depressing when you think about it.

So, do what I do: point and laugh!