Nom nom nom
Sometimes people just don't connect the dots.
Back in January, I sent invitations to many connections on LinkedIn for a webinar that I was going to provide during the week leading up to the second Trump Inauguration on the potential effects of a second Trump Administration. I sent one to a woman will call Jane. After the webinar, which she did not attend, Jane later responded,
"Ted, thank you for the opportunity. However, strategies like this provoke fear in the nonprofit sector and throughout our country."
Now, Jane works for a nonprofit in Northern Virginia that I know very well. So my response?
"Hi Jane, I wish you hadn't judged a book by its cover. Having known [XYZ Nonprofit] from 30 years living in Northern Virginia, I'm familiar with its efforts to support those with mental health issues and developmental disabilities. Indeed, as of 2023 I still had at least one friend serving on your board, and I have likely known and worked with a score or more of other XYZ board members over my time living in the area. An employee at XYZ was a member of my Leadership Arlington class back in the day and became a close friend.
"If you read the relevant portions of Project 2025, you'd see that there is strong effort there to restrict and undermine support for those with disabilities. https://dredf.org/blog-post/project-2025-and-the-disability-community/. President Trump's flurry of executive orders over the past few days shows that he intends to follow Project 2025 on many of its recommendations. His decision to hire P2025 personnel suggests the same.
"In light of that, it would be ignorant for your CEO, [Pete], to fail to think about the potential threats and opportunities arising from the change in Administrations. While I don't know [Pete] personally as yet, I did see a profound post a few years ago on LinkedIn from him. [This post noted how strongly [Pete] felt the need to work on behalf of those with disabilities.] I would expect the person who wrote that post to want to think about risks from all angles because of the weight that he and you carry as stewards of XYZ's mission. In fact, I suspect that Pete is in fact aware of these risks and is thinking about them.
If you had attended my workshop, you would have heard two very strong messages. First, I acknowledge my own bubble -- a progressive one that makes we wary of Donald Trump. As a result, I urged nonprofits to look for facts, rather than acting on my opinions or their own. Second, I urged nonprofits to look for opportunities, as well as threats, in the coming years.
"I don't know your politics, and I don't know your values. I do hope that the values of XYZ are not shifting in these challenging times."
I provide this exchange for a critical reason. Nonprofit leaders need to think about issues from their beneficiaries' perspectives. They are stewards of a mission that puts those beneficiaries first. Those beneficiaries are why they have a job. Jane, the beneficiaries whom you are duty-bound to advocate for are going to suffer. I don't think nonprofit employees must vote as they think would benefit their nonprofits' beneficiaries. I do think, however, that nonprofit leaders should consider the likely effects of political changes.
I did not host my webinars to provoke fear. The past four weeks did that, for anyone paying attention. I was trying, and continue to try, to help nonprofits face what I believe is the toughest challenge they have ever faced. I want nonprofits to take responsible steps to address these challenges.
Many of you are probably familiar with the meme, The Leopard Ate My Face. With all due respect, I believe Jane suffers from TLAMF by proxy. She may not suffer directly because of her support for Trump. Perhaps XYZ will not itself be harmed by the shifting federal priorities away from those who are in need. But even if Jane's job remains secure, those on whose behalf she is pledged to work -- those with intellectual and developmental disabilities -- certainly will.