It is still very likely that Clinton will get the nomination and Bloomberg will sit out, but a three- way race between two billionaires and a democratic socialist would certainly be ironic; not just because the socialist would be facing two billionaires, but because one billionaire would probably hand the other billionaire the election, further exposing how the political system favors the very rich.
Secretary Hillary Clinton has accepted millions in "speaking fees" and campaign contributions from interest groups - most notably Wall Street firms - that she will be in a position to help or hurt as president. She promises that the money will not influence her if she takes office, but voters are understandably skeptical.
For your amusement and mine, this being an all-fun-all-the-time election campaign, let's examine the relationships between our twenty-first-century plutocrats and the contenders who have raised $5 million or more in individual contributions or through super PACs and are at 5 percent or more in composite national polls.
After three decades of engineering a winner-take-all economy, and buying the political power to consummate their hold on the wealth created by the system they had rigged in their favor, America's plutocrats have been taking the final and irrevocable step of separating themselves permanently from the common course of American life.
Imagine that you are a group of rich and powerful people eager to be still richer and more powerful. But you live in a democratic society that gives each citizen an equal vote and thus sets sets limit on how much power you can amass. So you decide to steal the people's democracy. How can this be done?