 Well, if you needed more proof that capitalism is killing our democracy, what's left of it anyways? Look no further than this tweet by billionaire presidential candidate Tom Steyer, who writes, I'm thrilled to announce that today we've reached the required 130,000 individual donors to appear in September's debate. Just one more qualifying poll stands between us and that stage. Thanks to all who've contributed even $1 to this movement, we can't do this without you. Imagine being stupid enough to give any amount of money to a billionaire. I mean, that's your hard-earned cash and you're giving it to a billionaire. I don't know how to sugarcoat it, you're just stupid if you do that. Now second of all, I already know what some of you will say. How is that proof that billionaires and capitalism, you know, they're responsible for the death of democracy, isn't this proof that democracy is thriving? He announced that he's running for president and then 130,000 individual people thought his message resonates with me, so I'm gonna donate to him. Well, let me break it down for you. The reason why he was able to accumulate that many individual grassroots donations to begin with is because he is a billionaire. He has the resources to hire the amount of people necessary to amass that much donations. And there are more qualified, legitimate candidates in the race that are going to struggle to make it into the September debate because they don't have that much money because they aren't billionaires. But because Tom Steyer has the money and resources necessary to qualify for the debates, he may very well leapfrog multiple candidates in a crowded field that are better than him all because he's rich. And here's how he pulled this off. As Janine Santusi of USA Today reports, he has spent over 7 million on TV advertising and his campaign also plastered social media with ads urging voters to donate as little as $1, each of which would count as a unique donor to meet the debate minimum. So he's here because he has money, period. End of story. Do you see now why capitalism is killing democracy? Because he has the resources to absolutely blast his message. He spent millions of dollars to get 130,000 individual donations. And now he may very well replace someone else on the debate stage. That's absolutely disgusting that our system allows this to happen. I mean, what a joke. What an absolute joke of a system we have. In order to win, you have to have money. This is why so many candidates sell out to special interests because they know that they're not going to get anywhere if they don't actually raise a large sum of money because getting the word out, doing these television and radio advertisements and internet advertisements, this is all crucial to getting your name out there, boosting your name recognition and letting people know what your message is. And the problem is that once they're elected, they then return the favors of their donors, which is why Princeton University studied by Drs. Gillens and Page found that policy outcomes are dictated by elites and not average citizens. This is not a democracy. This is an oligarchy. And this is what happens. This is why capitalism and democracy cannot coexist because capitalism is a very corrosive force and it corrupts everything, including democracy itself. It corrupts news. It corrupts healthcare. It corrupts democracy. Democracy is absolutely unable to exist with capitalism. And unless you have a system of governance where capitalism is reigned in heavily, this is what happens. Capitalism will corrupt everything like the virus that it is. Now according to USA Today, there's only nine candidates thus far that have been confirmed to be on the debate stage in September. Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg, Beto O'Rourke and Andrew Yang, and now probably Tom Steyer. That means so far if they don't split it into two nights, that's 10 candidates. That means probably no Marianne Williamson. That may mean that Tulsi Gabbard, who outraised Tom Steyer, got more individual donations than him, may not appear on the debate stage. Think about how insane that is. A billionaire who used his resources to propel himself to that spot may actually replace a legitimate candidate like Tulsi Gabbard, who's important for the country because she's moving the Overton window to the left with regard to foreign policy. She's saying, look, Democrats are going to reclaim the mantle of being the anti-war party. I'm going to leave the charge. Her message is crucial, but instead we're going to get someone who's going to be a pseudo-populist billionaire just like Donald Trump was and replace her possibly. Now, I don't know that that's a foregone conclusion yet, but the fact that it's even a possibility is outrageous. We should never have to worry about billionaires like this buying their way onto the debate stage and replacing actual candidates. This is insane. This is absolute madness. Now I do want to share a short clip from MSNBC, and he talked a little bit about his message, and I couldn't not share this because it's just, it's laughable. So you've met the donor threshold, you still have a poll threshold to make. Most people believe you will get there and that you will be on the stage for those debates. So what will be your message? This will be an introduction for a lot of the country, although you've spent a lot of money, you've been on the air a lot in places like Iowa, but most of the country hasn't met you, doesn't know what you stand for in that crowded field. What will be your message in the debate? I have a simple message, Joe, and that's this. We have a broken government. There's been a hostile corporate takeover of our government, and I'm here to return to government of, by and for the people. I've been an outsider for 10 years, organizing coalitions of ordinary American citizens to take on unchecked corporate power. And for 10 years, we've been beating those corporations and winning. And that is my message, that that is job one, to take back the government from the corporate, the corporations who bought it. And it's a similar message, as you know, Tom, to someone like Senator Elizabeth Warren or Senator Bernie Sanders, who've been railing against corporations and corporate money in politics. How will you be different from them? Well, I think that the big difference is this, that I'm an outsider, that I have been doing it from the outside successfully for 10 years. If you look at the other people who are running for this nomination, they're overwhelmingly insiders. The top four people are all senators or former senators who have more than 70 years combined in the Congress and the Senate of the United States. So I think there's a big question for all Democratic voters. If job one is to take back the government from corporations, do you think it's gonna come from someone who's a grassroots activist and who's been doing it from the outside successfully? Or do you think an insider, somebody who's been working inside the Beltway for years, is the person who's actually gonna change DC? You can hear as we sit here speaking the criticism coming from Senator Warren or Senator Sanders that says it's a little rich for a billionaire, a guy who worked at Goldman Sachs and started an investment firm that made him a billionaire, talking about the interest of corporate power in America. How will you respond to that? Well, I would say for 10 years, we've been taking on their right to buy the government. It's not that I don't believe in the private sector, Joe. I'm someone who believes that the American economy is powered by the private sector. But what I know is this, I don't want them writing the rules for how they behave at the expense of the American people. I mean, it really is ironic to see a billionaire go on national television and bemoan corporate power. And I'm glad that the host spoke to that because that's what we were all thinking. How can you say this when you're a billionaire? You are here now. I'm talking to you because of corporate power. And notice how people who are bullshitters, they like to use the word corporate power in lieu of capitalism because they don't want to call out the actual system. They just want to say, well, some corporations were the problem. Maybe they're a little bit too greedy. But they won't actually condemn capitalism. He won't actually condemn the system itself. And the collection of institutions that make up our democracy that allowed him to amass that much wealth in the first place. It's just disgusting. And I'm sorry, he's trying to present himself as the true outsider. I'm the real outsider. Not someone like Bernie Sanders. He's been in politics forever. He's a senator. If you are a billionaire and you're trying to convince me that you're literally an outsider, that's a joke. And if I were interviewing him, I would just laugh in his face. Because if you are a billionaire, you are the ultimate insider. In a capitalist system, money doesn't just make you able to buy whatever you want to. This gives you power. So to say that you're an outsider, sure, you can argue that you haven't been in Congress, but that's not a benefit. We have a dipshit billionaire in power currently who hasn't had a real job a day in his life. And look how that's going. So to say, oh, I don't have experience and I'm an outsider, that's not a benefit to you. That's not a benefit to you. So if he makes it on the debate stage, that's one thing. But if he actually replaces good candidates like Marianne Williamson and Tulsi Gabbard, that would be so disgusting. I would be irate. Because think about this. Like, it's obvious that people like John Delaney, they don't have a chance in hell of qualifying if they do, I'd be surprised. But there are actual serious contenders who are bringing something unique to the table that may not get a spot at that next debate because all of a sudden he was able to leapfrog. And it's possible that he's going to use his resources to get up to 200,000 donations in order to get more than Tulsi Gabbard, for example, so he can kind of make the case, oh, no, I should qualify instead of her. That happens. That will be so disgusting. And just because of the fact that he's a billionaire, nobody should take him seriously. Because having money doesn't make you a serious presidential candidate. It makes you suspicious. It makes you suspect. Because if you amass that much wealth, if you have a billion dollars, you are inherently greedy and that makes you a bad person. So if you genuinely care about all of this corporate influence that we see in money and politics, stay home. Because you are not a solution, Tom Steyer. You are part of the problem. So put your money where your mouth is and maybe use some of your money to advertise for Bernie Sanders. A true populist. But he's not going to do that because he just wants power. Billionaires are so insufferable. We should not live in a system that allows people to make a billion dollars. We just shouldn't. That is a failure of our system, if that happens. And the fact that there are so many billionaires, the proliferation of billionaires, that is really evidence that capitalism is just garbage. And it's never going to work alongside democracy. Maybe it can work at certain times if you reform it. But I mean, we reformed capitalism before. And look, we're out again. If we reform it again, we're going to be here in another 50 to 100 years. It's going to be a cycle that repeats itself. You have to end capitalism completely. Because capitalism is a virus. And it turns everything into a money-making venture that just pits human beings against each other, that corrupts institutions. And this is evidence of that. And I wish more people would see it.