This thread devolved spectacularly. I give you my admiration.

Great article, thanks. I’m afraid you aren’t going to be able to convince Clinton supporters, though. It’s OK with them that this allows for a single individual to give up to $1.3 million over a two year election cycle, because they like George Clooney. The problem is that people like Walmart heir Alice Walton also…

So if Hillary wins she’ll owe favours to Wall Street, big oil and big pharma. If Bernie wins, he’ll owe favours to...the working poor.

I think it’s obscene that you think so little of the opinions of the working poor.

You’ve got the right stuff to make it in right-wing politics.

I don’t need to make assumptions when you’re telling me what you think.

Why would Sanders raise money for candidates in another party? That just doesn’t make sense. And since his funds are limited it makes even less sense. Do you think before you write?

No, I’m sorry, but this fundraiser is fucking egregious. Like, it used to be the case that politicians would go out of their way to avoid bringing up fundraisers where plates cost a couple thousand dollars. We long accepted this kind of shit as, like, the cost of doing business, but certainly not a tasteful activity…

No, that money is mostly going to her, getting washed through these other vehicles. The DNC/DCCC/DSCC won’t fund progressive candidates, anyway. There are Berniecrats all over the country who are ONLY able to mount primary challenges to corporatists like Wasserman-Schultz by hopping on Bernie’s coattails and getting…

Many people allege this fund is being used to persuade (read “buy”) superdelegate votes from these states.

I dunno what happened to Jezebel since I got re-grayed, but it seems that right-wing apologetics have taken over and a $350,000-per-chair fundraiser—even unholy by Republican standards—is now just “how the sausage gets made”.