As I read Rick Wilson's tweet on Bloomberg and Steyer...

[Cary]

and how their money will assure Orange Hitler's re-election I cringe.

I am no fan of big money in politics but what is more corrosive? Is money spent more corrosive than negativity?

The money is spent to do what? The money is primarily spent to divide and foment negativity. But WE, THE PEOPLE can defeat that money. It occurs to me that while well-meaning Rick Wilson's negativity is divisive and corrosive. If WE, THE PEOPLE want to defeat money then WE must put aside our petty bickering. Money depends on negativity. WE, THE PEOPLE depend on rejection of negativity and working together to achieve our common goals.

Money fueled negativity makes that more difficult but that is a poor excuse for failure and if we can coalesce then our victory takes on new significance. I don't want to complain about Steyer or Bloomberg. That is negative. I want to crush fascists.

[Demsrule86]

1. Bloomberg would rather lose to Trump than allow Warren or Sanders to be president...so I

find his running for office disgusting....and I am not even a Warren or Sanders supporter...Bloomberg ran as an independent in New York...and now he wants to save us from our own voters ...screw that.

[Cosmocat]

3. Honestly, as long as he runs as a Dem its not a problem

He won't come close to winning the nomination.

[BannonsLiver]

2. Steyer is a non factor

0.0

And he’s been in the race a while. Bloomberg’s impact is an unknown at this point.

I’m surprised Rick would even bring Steyer into it TBH.

[Cosmocat]

4. Histronics

As long as Bloomberg does not go indy, it won't change things much.

I actually like him a bit, but he won't come close to the dem nomination.

[BannonsLiver]

6. I tend to agree

[StevieM]

8. The non-factor Steyer is doing OK in some of the early state polls.

He is going to be in the next debate.

I think he deserves to be heard and considered, just like all the other candidates.

[BannonsLiver]

11. Cool story

But he’s a non factor. Reality beckons.

[StevieM]

13. Well then you can say that about most of the candidates in the race.

You can say that Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard are also non-factors.

There is no more reason to say it about Steyer than about any of those other candidates.

Using your definition of reality, the only people who are not non-factors are Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg.

[Baked Potato]

5. Take away the fact he's a billionaire,

Then, what’s left? What niche would he fill? I’d like to have a President who I am certain won’t be in it for the money. Will a billionaire make a decision that benefits the People, if that same decision drains his/her bank account?

[Cary]

7. Don't be distracted

I am a martial artist.

A key concept is to visualize your actions, with confidence in scoring.

This is no different.

[StevieM]

9. It is completely unfair to compare Tom Steyer to Michael Bloomberg.

Bloomberg supported George W. Bush and Dick Cheney for re-election in 2004. Steyer did not.

Tom Steyer is long-time champion of liberal causes, and especially leading the fight against climate change. He should not simply be summed up as just another billionaire.

[Pachamama]

10. I am certain that Steyer is not in the election for the money....Bloomberg....not so much...in fact

...I am pretty certain it is a huge factor.

I don't dislike Bloomberg personally. In fact, I admire and respect how he as a businessman grew his media empire and what he achieved. I do however disagree with him on many of his positions and while I think he will attract many moderate Republicans and Democrats and Independents alike, I do not think that he will be good for this country compared to other Democratic candidates.

If its going to be a battle of the Billionaires, then I would vote for Steyer.

[Land Shark]

12. Good point!