Bloomin'

Post-2016 there has been a big shift in certain segments of Official Democrats (a vaguely defined bunch, but still a bunch). We went from "better things would be nice, but hard to get support for!" to "better things would be nice, but we just can't get it through the Senate" to "lol, better things aren't possible, we are just here to foam the runway to misery and death." Bloomberg is basically "Actually, you were right about us all along. Suckers!"

But even more than that, he's proving that "sure, you proved that small money can power elections, but that's NO FUN AT ALL because the people who give that money are gross and expect nice things from us."

But even if one accepts that those arguments might be plausible (they aren’t even slam dunks), they do not render an outcome in which Bloomberg’s billions hijack the Democratic nomination acceptable.

The blithe tossing aside of this new grass-roots model of fundraising — simply by virtue of the fact that a single plutocrat, whatever his own considerable accomplishments, came along who can personally outspend millions of politically motivated Americans — is itself an arguably unacceptable price to pay.

It was very depressing to realize that the money in elections isn't just about the money needed to win elections It's a mutual benefit society. It's a club people - givers and receivers - pay dues into in their own way. $27 ain't the entry fee!