Or, as this author has affectionately rebranded them as…
Current Financial Condition of The Lincoln Project:
Cash on Hand: As of the end of 2024, The Lincoln Project had $209,867 in cash on hand.
Liabilities: There were significant liabilities, with unpaid invoices amounting to $863,348. This includes a situation where liabilities are four times higher than the cash on hand, indicating a strained financial condition.
Expenditures: Throughout 2024, The Lincoln Project raised $15.5 million but spent $16.2 million, leading to a deficit. This spending pattern has continued, with operational expenditures consuming a large portion of their funds. For instance, in the first half of 2023, they raised $3.6 million but reported only $34,717 in political expenditures, while the rest ($3.5 million) was spent on operating costs.
Vendor Bills: A significant portion of their liabilities are owed to vendors, with some reports indicating that these payments are largely to LLCs owned by members of The Lincoln Project, suggesting internal financial arrangements.
Financial Strategy: The group has been criticized for spending on non-political activities like podcast production, consulting, and even awards submissions, rather than focusing on political advertising or direct campaign efforts. This has led to questions about where the money is being allocated and the effectiveness of their financial strategy.
Overall Assessment: The Lincoln Project’s financial status appears precarious, with more money going out than coming in, a growing pile of unpaid bills, and a significant portion of funds not being directly used for their stated mission of political advertising against Trump and Trumpism. This situation suggests a need for financial restructuring or a significant influx of new donations to stabilize their operations.
Given these points, The Lincoln Project’s finances are currently challenged, with a clear need for better financial management or strategy to ensure sustainability beyond their current cash reserves and significant liabilities.
The addition of Resolute Square has had a multifaceted impact on The Lincoln Project’s financial condition, based on the available information:
Direct Financial Impact:
Diversification of Revenue Streams: Resolute Square was launched as a media venture by some of the key figures from The Lincoln Project, aiming to generate income through subscriptions, content sales, and potentially advertising. This diversification was intended to provide an alternative revenue source for the individuals involved, reducing dependency on political fundraising which is often inconsistent and tied to election cycles. However, there’s no direct evidence in the provided data that revenues from Resolute Square have notably improved The Lincoln Project’s financial health.
Shared Expenses and Overlap: There might be shared operational costs between The Lincoln Project and Resolute Square, given the overlapping personnel. This could lead to a more efficient use of resources if managed well, but it also complicates financial transparency and accountability, as funds might move between the two entities in ways not fully disclosed to the public.
Indirect Impact:
Brand and Reputation: The Lincoln Project’s association with Resolute Square, particularly through shared founders like Stuart Stevens, Rick Wilson, Reed Galen, and Joe Trippi, might have both positive and negative impacts:
Positive: It could potentially attract more donors or subscribers if the content of Resolute Square is seen as valuable or influential.
Negative: The controversies surrounding The Lincoln Project, including financial mismanagement allegations and internal scandals, might also affect Resolute Square’s credibility, potentially deterring potential subscribers or sponsors.
Focus on Content Over Political Action: The move towards media with Resolute Square might have shifted some focus away from The Lincoln Project’s original mission of political advertising against Trump and Trumpism. While this pivot could aim to secure long-term viability through content monetization, it also means less direct political spending, which could be perceived by donors as a deviation from the core mission, possibly impacting future fundraising.
Financial Strain:
Additional Expenses: Launching and maintaining Resolute Square involves costs, both in terms of content creation and marketing to gain subscribers. If these costs are not offset by sufficient revenue, it could strain The Lincoln Project’s finances further, especially considering they already faced issues with high operational costs and liabilities.
Unpaid Bills: The Lincoln Project was already dealing with significant unpaid invoices, and any financial entanglement with Resolute Square could complicate matters, particularly if funds are being redirected to support the new venture’s growth.
While Resolute Square was launched to create a new revenue stream and perhaps provide a more sustainable model for some of The Lincoln Project’s founders, its direct positive impact on The Lincoln Project’s finances is not documented. Instead, there’s a risk that it might add to the financial strain if not managed carefully, especially given the backdrop of The Lincoln Project’s existing financial challenges. The overall impact would depend on how well Resolute Square performs in terms of subscriber acquisition, content quality, and financial management, alongside how transparently these ventures are separated or integrated in financial terms.
About those contributors for Resolute Square. So much for those Lincoln Project “Conservative Principles” heh?:
Ruth Ben-Ghiat:
Ruth Ben-Ghiat is generally regarded as having a liberal bias in her political commentary. She is a historian who focuses on authoritarianism, fascism, and propaganda, often critiquing right-wing leaders and movements. Her work, including her book “Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present,” explicitly frames modern political figures like Donald Trump in the context of historical authoritarianism, which aligns with a liberal critique of such figures.
David Pepper:
David Pepper is known for his strong Democratic affiliations. He served as the Chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party and has written books like “The People’s House” and “Laboratories of Autocracy,” where he critiques Republican strategies and policies. His work and public statements reflect a clear liberal bias, advocating for Democratic causes and policies.
Simon Rosenberg:
Simon Rosenberg is a Democratic strategist and founder of the New Democrat Network (NDN), which aimed to modernize the Democratic Party. His political analysis and commentary are firmly within the liberal spectrum, often defending Democratic candidates and policies while critiquing Republican ones. His recent assertions about polling biases in favor of Trump further underline his liberal political stance.
Steven Beschloss:
Beschloss is known for his liberal political affiliations. His writings, blog posts, and social media activity consistently critique conservative policies and figures, particularly those associated with Donald Trump and the Republican Party. He has expressed concerns about threats to democracy, often framing these within a narrative that aligns with Democratic viewpoints. This includes his commentary on corporate media’s handling of Trump, advocating for stronger Democratic opposition, and his association with platforms and forums like Democratic Underground, which lean left. His work reflects a clear bias towards liberal ideologies and a pro-democracy stance, making his political commentary less balanced and more aligned with progressive thought.
Kristin Kobes Du Mez:
Du Mez is a historian and author, best known for her work “Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation,” which critiques the intersection of evangelical Christianity with politics, particularly focusing on masculinity and nationalism. While Du Mez does not explicitly state her political affiliation, her writings and public statements lean towards a liberal critique of conservative evangelicalism. Her analysis often highlights the political and cultural implications of white Christian nationalism, suggesting a bias against the conservative, right-wing tendencies within evangelical Christianity.
Trygve Olson:
Olson is known for his affiliation with The Lincoln Project, where he serves as a Senior Adviser, indicating a clear anti-Trump stance within the broader Republican context. Initially, Olson worked on numerous Republican campaigns and was involved with the International Republican Institute (IRI), showcasing his roots in traditional conservative politics. However, his current activities, particularly with The Lincoln Project, reflect a strong political bias against Donald Trump and MAGA politics, positioning him among the “Never Trump” Republicans.
Gevin Reynolds:
Reynolds is known for his strong affiliations with the Democratic Party and liberal political ideologies. He has a history of working within the Biden-Harris administration, notably as a speechwriter for Vice President Kamala Harris. His public writings and commentary, published in outlets like The Root and The Hill, consistently reflect a liberal bias, focusing on issues like racial justice, democracy, and critiques of far-right extremism.
Simon Rosenberg:
Rosenberg is a well-known Democratic strategist and the founder of the New Democrat Network (NDN), an organization dedicated to promoting progressive politics. His political affiliation is clearly with the Democratic Party, where he has engaged in numerous roles, including advising Democratic campaigns and advocating for progressive policies. Rosenberg is recognized for his liberal bias, often critiquing Republican strategies and defending Democratic initiatives.
Lisa Senecal:
Senecal is politically aligned with the Democratic Party and is known for her liberal bias. She has been an active political activist, writer, and co-host of “We’re Speaking” with The Lincoln Project, where she often voices strong support for Democratic candidates and policies. Her involvement with the Vermont Commission on Women, her contributions to various liberal-leaning media outlets like NPR, PBS, The Daily Beast, and her commentary on issues like gender equity, racial justice, and opposition to Trumpism all reflect her progressive stance. Senecal’s work and public statements consistently critique conservative politics, particularly under the Trump administration, indicating a clear liberal political bias.
Stuart Stevens:
Stevens is a political consultant and strategist known for his long history with the Republican Party. He has worked on several high-profile Republican campaigns, including those of Bob Dole, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney. However, Stevens has become notably critical of the GOP, particularly with the rise of Donald Trump. He co-founded The Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump super PAC, and now openly identifies as a “Never Trumper.” His political bias has shifted from traditional Republican conservatism to a more centrist or even liberal critique of modern Republican politics, focusing on what he perceives as the party’s move towards autocracy and away from the principles he once advocated for.
Jeff Timmer:
Timmer is a political consultant and strategist known for his long association with the Republican Party. He served as the executive director of the Michigan Republican Party from 2005 to 2009. However, Timmer has since become a vocal critic of Donald Trump and Trumpism, leading him to part ways with the GOP establishment. He is now recognized for his “Never Trump” stance, serving as a senior advisor to The Lincoln Project. His political bias has shifted significantly from traditional Republican values to a more liberal-leaning critique of contemporary conservative politics, particularly highlighting what he sees as authoritarian tendencies within the modern Republican Party.
And, of course, the pièce de résistance…
Rick Wilson:
Wilson is a political strategist and commentator with a long history of involvement in Republican politics, though he’s now known for his vehement opposition to Donald Trump and Trumpism. Originally, Wilson worked as a Republican consultant, contributing to campaigns for figures like Rudy Giuliani and George W. Bush. However, his political bias shifted markedly after Trump’s rise, leading him to co-found The Lincoln Project, a group of anti-Trump Republicans. Wilson’s commentary and writings, including his book “Everything Trump Touches Dies,” reflect a strong anti-Trump and anti-conservative establishment stance, positioning him as a vocal critic from within the Republican Party, advocating for a return to what he sees as traditional conservative values while promoting a liberal critique of contemporary Republican politics.
General Assessment of External Contributors:
The contributors like Ben-Ghiat, Pepper, and Rosenberg, along with others who appear on platforms like Resolute Square, are often known for:
Liberal Bias: They tend to offer critiques of conservative or right-wing politics, policies, and figures, aligning their commentary with progressive or liberal viewpoints. Their work frequently involves warning against what they perceive as threats to democracy from the right, advocating for progressive policies, and analyzing political events through a lens that favors Democratic or liberal ideologies.
Context of Contributions: On platforms like Resolute Square, which was founded by former Lincoln Project members with a clear anti-Trump and anti-Trumpism mission, it’s expected that contributors would lean liberal. The platform’s purpose is to counter what its founders see as threats to democracy, which, in their view, predominantly come from the right.
In summary, these external contributors are more known for their liberal biases in politics rather than for presenting views in a strictly fair and balanced manner across the political spectrum. Their analyses and writings contribute to a narrative that’s critical of conservative politics, fitting Resolute Square’s mission as an anti-Trumpist, pro-democracy advocacy group.
For further reading…
Dive deeper into the murky waters of political maneuvering with RighteousCause.net’s exposés on The Lincoln Project and its offshoot, Resolute Square. Our articles peel back the layers to reveal the truth behind these organizations, branding them as “Grifters of the First Order.” Discover how they’ve navigated the political landscape, not for the cause they claim, but for personal gain. Check out these revealing pieces and get the unfiltered facts on their operations.
• The Political Compromise of Tara Setmayer and the other Grifters of the Lincoln Project
• The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson –– the laugh line that keeps on giving.
• With grifter donations slipping, hucksterism demands a new grand scheme. Lincoln Project invents Resolute Square.
• Lincoln Project’s Stuart Stevens says “I keep getting it wrong.”
• Resolute Square … a “New & Improved” Lincoln Project.
• Still sending money to the Lincoln Project? Your IQ score just came back … you were beat out by a box of rocks by 10 points.