Hello from New York, and welcome back to The Stratosphere.

In today’s grab-bag of reporting: the latest news on who will and won’t take Sheryl Sandberg’s money; the continued ascendance of Peter Thiel; and some news on the other secretive conclave for Silicon Valley billionaires that happened over the weekend (no, not The Giving Pledge retreat).

But first, three tech-donor storylines to have on your radar tonight as election results roll in across California:

1. Can San Francisco’s coalition of Republicans and moderate, tech-aligned Democrats successfully oust progressive Chesa Boudin as the city’s district attorney? The recall election has the feeling of a national referendum, in miniature, as Democrats reckon with elevated crime and homelessness, similar to the L.A. mayor’s race that my partner Peter Hamby explored over the weekend. It has been remarkable to watch Chesa, in turn, try to turn the recall into a referendum on the power of big donors—he’s gone after Silicon Valley billionaires in his direct mail and in interviews. Is that a winning strategy?
2. Will David Sacks & Co. succeed in helping Democrat-turned-independent Michael Shellenberger, an author and homelessness activist who has emerged as a hero to the anti-woke tech set, to take on Governor Gavin Newsom? Shellenberger’s longshot campaign is also focused on homelessness, an issue that two-thirds of voters say Newsom has botched. Tech donors like Sacks have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the last-minute super PAC effort. Newsom remains the overwhelming favorite in November regardless of who emerges to challenge him...

P.S. As a reminder, you're receiving the free version of The Rainmaker at . For full access to Puck, and to each of my colleagues, you can subscribe here.

The world of philanthropy and political donations, after all, is often rather risk-averse. Advisors, who make big bets with other peoples’ money, are highly attuned to the possibility that a particularly controversial ultra-high-net-worth donor could alienate their peers or taint an organization. The one name that has come up more than any other in these conversations is Sheryl Sandberg.

That is why I found it hard to not marvel last week as I read Sandberg’s announcement that she plans to dedicate more of her time to philanthropy after stepping down as Facebook’s first and only chief operating officer. Sandberg once had unimpeachable bonafides in the Democratic establishment: Larry Summers protégé, Obama-era feminist icon, presumptive Clinton cabinet member. She was reportedly ready to leave Facebook for Washington, in 2016, had the election gone the other way. Instead Sandberg became an avatar of Facebook’s work with the Trump campaign, and an increasingly toxic personage for the left as she managed the company through scandal after scandal. Democratic leaders, including Clinton, turned on Facebook and on Sandberg. Liberal politicians began to talk about Silicon Valley as if it were Big Oil or Big Tobacco. In what I thought was an era-defining moment, Elizabeth Warren, for one, announced that she would not take any money from Big Tech executives, just like she wouldn’t accept support from leaders at fossil-fuel companies...