The ultrarich keep losing Democratic primaries

MS NOW -  Tom Steyer ran for governor of California as a climate crusader endorsed by Bernie Sanders’ political organization, Our Revolution. He also spent at least $216 million of his own money on the race — and in the end, that was the only thing voters seemed to remember. With nearly 58% of the vote counted, he is running third. 

For generations, a personal fortune was among the surest assets in American politics — the thing that bought name recognition, blanketed the airwaves and cleared a primary field. This year, for Democratic candidates across the country, it is starting to look like a liability. 

The timing is unkind to the ultrawealthy. In a March YouGov survey, 77% of adults said the wealthy have too much political power, and 52% said the government should try to reduce the share of wealth held by billionaires. More than half of adults told a May Politico poll that cost of living is the “worst they can remember.” Against that backdrop, self-funding candidates — once a recruiter’s dream — have become a harder sell. 

Steyer, who made his money founding and running a hedge fund, found that out the hard way. In California’s liberal electorate, his wealth became the case against him. His advertising blitz provoked attacks: Xavier Becerra’s campaign posted videos telling voters they “have the power to put an end to the Tom Steyer ads.” With a one-time billionaire tax set to appear on the November ballot, the idea of electing one of the ultrawealthy at the same moment proved too much for some. “In the end, I didn’t want to vote for a billionaire,” one voter, a 22-year-old UC San Diego student, told The New York Times plainly.