Progressive Support for a billionaire who made his money polluting the planet and constructing private prisons is one level of hypocrisy. Hiding millions and manipulating voters is something else
You're so welcome Mike! I'm happy to give credit where credit is due! I admire you for having the courage to speak the truth whether it's popular or not 🙏💪
I was amazed at how many progressives jumped on Steyers billionaire train. Simply amazed. It's the inconsistencies that continue to floor me with progressives. Ranting against billionaires for years. Then Steyer enters the California governor's race and boom! It's suddenly all good lol. I'm seeing it with LGBTQ elected officials and candidates. Ranting for years about trans, gay rights for years and yet, we have a local candidate who has MANY other awesome character traits plus he's gay. Progressives will get to him after the primary but now? Dayum. Rep. Richie Torres in the Bronx is a Black, Latino, gay man and progressives give him all kinds of hell b/c he doesn't pass the purity tests. Torres was my first choice for governor btw.
Thanks again for your thoughtful insight Mike. Steyer was out for me early on after I looked more into his background, and it wasn’t just that he was a billionaire, and I couldn’t put my finger on why. You equating the hypocrisy on the right with Trump versus the left with Steyer solidifies exactly why I can’t vote for him! I am not terribly excited about any of the candidates, but am supporting Becerra because it seems a lot of young college Democrats and working people are backing him. I am retired and financially stable, but want my vote to boost the voice of those young people. And I really like the idea of having a Latino governor- in a state that is 40% Latino, why haven’t we had a Latino governor since 1875???
Right on point, Mike. So many progressives (most of whom have at least a four-year degree- use your critical thinking skills, people) seem content to let a billionaire buy the governorship of the 4th largest economy on the planet. Thank you, too, for shining a light on the use of paid influencers. I've seen my friends post these comments on their social media without having any idea where they are coming from.
No sides are different- they are both embedded in Epstein class level of power and corruption- but I honestly believe some candidates truly are principled. I think the trick is finding them and supporting them.
And also I didnt mean to be glib because you have actually given up so much. And so has your family. I continue to hope that there are more normal people out there who care about moral principles. I hope there are, Mike
There is zero difference between wide swaths of hyper partisans in both parties. Of those ordinary folks who are true believers.
Where the parties differ is amongst the elite, the politicians and pundits. Under Trump, the level of dishonesty on the Right has exploded. Corrupt individuals like Patel and RFK Jr have gained power and previously honest politicos like Rubio and Graham have embraced the corruption to stay in power.
well, I have been really disappointed and angry with the Dems here that the best we could do to replace Collins was Mills (who didn’t want to run and waited too long to announce and is too old) and Platner (obvious character issues and absolutely no experience or history of community service until he announced for Senate). Progressives who like Platner react to any doubt or criticism of him like MAGA defends Trump. It’s extremely disturbing to see the blue version happening here, in my opinion. Collins holds a seat that Dems must win and each faction in the party cared more about their own power than taking it seriously. We have a ton of younger Dems in the Governor race who could have run in the Senate race. That’s how I feel about it.
While you are right about Steyer- the problem we have facing progressives in California is what to do. Katie Porter has good principles but can she work with people and can she run a bureaucracy this big? Becerra has a great personal story and he can do the administrative part of the job but he is your classic establishment Democrat and he takes money from Chevron and other not so wonderful people. I have really struggled on this vote.
I lost so much respect for Katie Porter. I loved her whiteboard shtick at first, but it became obvious over time it was often dishonest and just performative. And her thin-skinned walkout on an easy interview didnt help
Great article Mike - it really has me thinking. 100% opposed to anyone "buying" an election and money in politics right now is a huge problem. I haven't followed Steyer, and know little about him. To me, voting is about authenticity and believability in a candidate. I always thought Trump was a snake oil salesman and if that's the case with Steyer because he made all his money polluting the earth, I buy that argument. But do you vote against someone with a lot of money who has view that you approve of, if you believe that they truly hold those views?
I think JFK was viewed favorably as a President and did a lot of good during his short Presidency, yet came from one of the wealthiest families in America. I would have considered voting for Bloomberg in an election and thought he did a good job as Mayor of NYC. Mark Cuban is a person who I have heard speak and he says things that make sense politically to me and is a billionaire who seems to have made money "reasonably".
So buying an election leaves me really cold, but given where we are post Citizens United, not sure how to react to billionaires who favor Progressive policies. But thanks for making me think harder about whether you can ever vote for a billionaire who favors those policies.
I believe the Democratic Party began its sellout to the FDR base long before the Buckley and Citizens United cases. It began with Clinton and has only
gotten worse with each passing year. I am almost 80 and a 8th generation Californian. I can’t bring myself to vote for another white male billionaire and will cast my vote for Becerra one of my people😊.
I was very impressed with Steyer in his interview with Hasan Piker. He was very clear eyed, intelligent and innovative. He eminated passion and integrity. So different from your typical Democratic hack with their same formulaic answers. He's exactly with CA needs to recover from its 8 year doldrum.
I can understand the criticism of supporting a billionaire who's buying an election while opposing billionaire influence in general. It's the system we currently have. I've ignored all of his ads and watched him interact with a very tough leftwing interviewer. He won my vote.
For kicks I went to check the tip contributors to each candidate. It’s pretty eye opening. I was most impressed with the amount of money from individual small dollar donors for the different candidates.
I massively disagree with the article. Tom Steyer is a class traitor, as he advocates for something not in his material interest as a billionaire. Marx's best friend and collaborator was a factory owner; it's not hypocritical to work with someone whose class you fundamentally oppose if they share your goals.
Then re-read it because that’s not the point. While you may rationalize his horrible actions however you want to justify your own beliefs the problem is using his ill gotten millions to manipulate the voters without disclosing that activity.
You can try to justify that however you want but it’s anti-democratic and destroying confidence in the systems and elections.
The fact that you won’t face that was the whole reason I wrote the essay. It’s no different than MAGA. Not one bit. It’s stealing elections plain and simple
I reread the article, and I think there are four separate issues:
1. **Billionaire involvement**
Disagreement. I do not believe Steyer being a billionaire is a problem by itself. A person’s class position does not automatically invalidate their political goals, and working with someone wealthy is not inherently hypocritical if the goals align.
2. **Progressive hypocrisy**
Partial agreement. If progressive groups criticize the influence of billionaires in politics, they should explain why supporting Steyer is consistent with that principle. But the hypocrisy argument depends on whether they oppose all billionaire involvement or specifically oppose billionaire influence that conflicts with their policy goals.
3. **Source of wealth**
Partial disagreement. It is fair to scrutinize where Steyer’s money came from, especially if some of it came from industries progressives condemn. But Steyer has acknowledged that issue and argues that he is now using that money to fight the system that produced it. The real question is whether voters find that credible.
4. **Paid influencer disclosure**
Agreement. This is the strongest factual issue. If influencers were paid and their posts did not disclose that to viewers, it would be deceptive and warrant investigation.
I think the article overreaches in its nigh-apocalyptic framing. The facts support a serious critique about transparency, credibility, and political consistency. They may even support an investigation into campaign-disclosure violations. But I do not think they yet support language like “stealing elections” or the broader implication that this represents democracy entering its final stage.
I shared this on Robert Arnold's site when he mentioned this , but I was glad back in this administration's* first term, when Steyer launched Need to Impeach, which I subscribed to. Steyer's arguments were flawless.
And now he turns out to have tentacles in the detention system? I don't live in California, but that blows my support for him. I can't really say I'm surprised, though. And it isn't new. Been around too long, and researched and experienced too much to feign ignorance.
For now I'll stick with: First, organize locally, and ally with others regionally; Second, vote as your conscience dictates; Third, put pressure on office holders once in - including the ones we already communicate with and support. Maybe especially them. I recently cast my primary vote in this one-party Democratic county, but not before vetting the candidates as heavily as I could.
Update and research on Steyer appreciated. It's uphill for sure, but we gotta carry on.
Wayne, I agree with you. It is key to organize locally and ally regionally. And it may be cynical, but I assume most (if mot all) billionaires have their hands in dark money.
It's pretty crazy, even when millionaires and billionaires aren't actually in office. Corruption is obvious and rife in this county (in Maryland, just outside DC). I did find one local candidate who sounded good and actually communicated with me. Win or lose, he got my vote. It's the principle of the thing too. But we've got to aim higher than that.
Don’t count me in on selling out to a billionaire. I am voting for Katie Porter.
And, how is it good for America that Steyer “self-funds” his campaign?
Brilliantly expressed. Thank you Mike!
Thank you April 🙏🏼 I knew it wouldn’t be a popular piece but I can’t be silent when all the signs are there
So what if it ain't "popular?" Belief in the world being flat and the sun revolving around it because 'God' used to be in fashion too!
Hahaha! Keep doing what you do Mike! Your essays are all excellent. Leave the popularity contest (s) to the Kardashians.
Thanks Adam 🙏🏼
You're so welcome Mike! I'm happy to give credit where credit is due! I admire you for having the courage to speak the truth whether it's popular or not 🙏💪
I was amazed at how many progressives jumped on Steyers billionaire train. Simply amazed. It's the inconsistencies that continue to floor me with progressives. Ranting against billionaires for years. Then Steyer enters the California governor's race and boom! It's suddenly all good lol. I'm seeing it with LGBTQ elected officials and candidates. Ranting for years about trans, gay rights for years and yet, we have a local candidate who has MANY other awesome character traits plus he's gay. Progressives will get to him after the primary but now? Dayum. Rep. Richie Torres in the Bronx is a Black, Latino, gay man and progressives give him all kinds of hell b/c he doesn't pass the purity tests. Torres was my first choice for governor btw.
You've really articulated my deep discomfort with Steyer (and then some). Thanks as always.
Thanks again for your thoughtful insight Mike. Steyer was out for me early on after I looked more into his background, and it wasn’t just that he was a billionaire, and I couldn’t put my finger on why. You equating the hypocrisy on the right with Trump versus the left with Steyer solidifies exactly why I can’t vote for him! I am not terribly excited about any of the candidates, but am supporting Becerra because it seems a lot of young college Democrats and working people are backing him. I am retired and financially stable, but want my vote to boost the voice of those young people. And I really like the idea of having a Latino governor- in a state that is 40% Latino, why haven’t we had a Latino governor since 1875???
Right on point, Mike. So many progressives (most of whom have at least a four-year degree- use your critical thinking skills, people) seem content to let a billionaire buy the governorship of the 4th largest economy on the planet. Thank you, too, for shining a light on the use of paid influencers. I've seen my friends post these comments on their social media without having any idea where they are coming from.
Very well stated.
On point, as usual, Mike!
Thanks. This one was tough for me. It’s so hard to have given everything up and believed the other side was different but…it’s not.
We’re in deep trouble
No sides are different- they are both embedded in Epstein class level of power and corruption- but I honestly believe some candidates truly are principled. I think the trick is finding them and supporting them.
And also I didnt mean to be glib because you have actually given up so much. And so has your family. I continue to hope that there are more normal people out there who care about moral principles. I hope there are, Mike
You weren’t glib at all
I have great respect and admiration for you ex-Republican Never Trumpers. And thank you for your role in creating the Lincoln Project
I disagree that the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans. Huge difference.
There is literally zero difference between wide swaths of hyper partisans in both parties.
Choosing to be blind to the facts doesn’t make it so - it just provides more proof to my argument
There is zero difference between wide swaths of hyper partisans in both parties. Of those ordinary folks who are true believers.
Where the parties differ is amongst the elite, the politicians and pundits. Under Trump, the level of dishonesty on the Right has exploded. Corrupt individuals like Patel and RFK Jr have gained power and previously honest politicos like Rubio and Graham have embraced the corruption to stay in power.
I assume this is why you left the party.
You don’t have to tell me that, I live in Maine. 🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
How’re things over there, Alina? Do you still feel the same way about Platner?
well, I have been really disappointed and angry with the Dems here that the best we could do to replace Collins was Mills (who didn’t want to run and waited too long to announce and is too old) and Platner (obvious character issues and absolutely no experience or history of community service until he announced for Senate). Progressives who like Platner react to any doubt or criticism of him like MAGA defends Trump. It’s extremely disturbing to see the blue version happening here, in my opinion. Collins holds a seat that Dems must win and each faction in the party cared more about their own power than taking it seriously. We have a ton of younger Dems in the Governor race who could have run in the Senate race. That’s how I feel about it.
I’m sorry, Alina. It’s tough to see the tea party version crop up in the Democratic Party. I’m glad you have younger candidates coming up though.
Republicans in 2026 are vastly worse than Democrats.
While you are right about Steyer- the problem we have facing progressives in California is what to do. Katie Porter has good principles but can she work with people and can she run a bureaucracy this big? Becerra has a great personal story and he can do the administrative part of the job but he is your classic establishment Democrat and he takes money from Chevron and other not so wonderful people. I have really struggled on this vote.
I lost so much respect for Katie Porter. I loved her whiteboard shtick at first, but it became obvious over time it was often dishonest and just performative. And her thin-skinned walkout on an easy interview didnt help
As a proud CA Democrat, I agree that Steyer’s spending is obscene! All that money could have been better spent outside of politics. What a waste!
Great article Mike - it really has me thinking. 100% opposed to anyone "buying" an election and money in politics right now is a huge problem. I haven't followed Steyer, and know little about him. To me, voting is about authenticity and believability in a candidate. I always thought Trump was a snake oil salesman and if that's the case with Steyer because he made all his money polluting the earth, I buy that argument. But do you vote against someone with a lot of money who has view that you approve of, if you believe that they truly hold those views?
I think JFK was viewed favorably as a President and did a lot of good during his short Presidency, yet came from one of the wealthiest families in America. I would have considered voting for Bloomberg in an election and thought he did a good job as Mayor of NYC. Mark Cuban is a person who I have heard speak and he says things that make sense politically to me and is a billionaire who seems to have made money "reasonably".
So buying an election leaves me really cold, but given where we are post Citizens United, not sure how to react to billionaires who favor Progressive policies. But thanks for making me think harder about whether you can ever vote for a billionaire who favors those policies.
I believe the Democratic Party began its sellout to the FDR base long before the Buckley and Citizens United cases. It began with Clinton and has only
gotten worse with each passing year. I am almost 80 and a 8th generation Californian. I can’t bring myself to vote for another white male billionaire and will cast my vote for Becerra one of my people😊.
I was very impressed with Steyer in his interview with Hasan Piker. He was very clear eyed, intelligent and innovative. He eminated passion and integrity. So different from your typical Democratic hack with their same formulaic answers. He's exactly with CA needs to recover from its 8 year doldrum.
I can understand the criticism of supporting a billionaire who's buying an election while opposing billionaire influence in general. It's the system we currently have. I've ignored all of his ads and watched him interact with a very tough leftwing interviewer. He won my vote.
For kicks I went to check the tip contributors to each candidate. It’s pretty eye opening. I was most impressed with the amount of money from individual small dollar donors for the different candidates.
I massively disagree with the article. Tom Steyer is a class traitor, as he advocates for something not in his material interest as a billionaire. Marx's best friend and collaborator was a factory owner; it's not hypocritical to work with someone whose class you fundamentally oppose if they share your goals.
Then re-read it because that’s not the point. While you may rationalize his horrible actions however you want to justify your own beliefs the problem is using his ill gotten millions to manipulate the voters without disclosing that activity.
You can try to justify that however you want but it’s anti-democratic and destroying confidence in the systems and elections.
The fact that you won’t face that was the whole reason I wrote the essay. It’s no different than MAGA. Not one bit. It’s stealing elections plain and simple
I reread the article, and I think there are four separate issues:
1. **Billionaire involvement**
Disagreement. I do not believe Steyer being a billionaire is a problem by itself. A person’s class position does not automatically invalidate their political goals, and working with someone wealthy is not inherently hypocritical if the goals align.
2. **Progressive hypocrisy**
Partial agreement. If progressive groups criticize the influence of billionaires in politics, they should explain why supporting Steyer is consistent with that principle. But the hypocrisy argument depends on whether they oppose all billionaire involvement or specifically oppose billionaire influence that conflicts with their policy goals.
3. **Source of wealth**
Partial disagreement. It is fair to scrutinize where Steyer’s money came from, especially if some of it came from industries progressives condemn. But Steyer has acknowledged that issue and argues that he is now using that money to fight the system that produced it. The real question is whether voters find that credible.
4. **Paid influencer disclosure**
Agreement. This is the strongest factual issue. If influencers were paid and their posts did not disclose that to viewers, it would be deceptive and warrant investigation.
I think the article overreaches in its nigh-apocalyptic framing. The facts support a serious critique about transparency, credibility, and political consistency. They may even support an investigation into campaign-disclosure violations. But I do not think they yet support language like “stealing elections” or the broader implication that this represents democracy entering its final stage.
Fair enough!
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I shared this on Robert Arnold's site when he mentioned this , but I was glad back in this administration's* first term, when Steyer launched Need to Impeach, which I subscribed to. Steyer's arguments were flawless.
And now he turns out to have tentacles in the detention system? I don't live in California, but that blows my support for him. I can't really say I'm surprised, though. And it isn't new. Been around too long, and researched and experienced too much to feign ignorance.
For now I'll stick with: First, organize locally, and ally with others regionally; Second, vote as your conscience dictates; Third, put pressure on office holders once in - including the ones we already communicate with and support. Maybe especially them. I recently cast my primary vote in this one-party Democratic county, but not before vetting the candidates as heavily as I could.
Update and research on Steyer appreciated. It's uphill for sure, but we gotta carry on.
Wayne, I agree with you. It is key to organize locally and ally regionally. And it may be cynical, but I assume most (if mot all) billionaires have their hands in dark money.
It's pretty crazy, even when millionaires and billionaires aren't actually in office. Corruption is obvious and rife in this county (in Maryland, just outside DC). I did find one local candidate who sounded good and actually communicated with me. Win or lose, he got my vote. It's the principle of the thing too. But we've got to aim higher than that.
Steyer has a sordit past. He got out of the prison and fossil fuel business years ago. Listen to his interview with Hasan Piker. Very enlightning.