> and yet, when we look at most of the political endorsements of Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett, Michael Bloomberg, Bill Gates and nearly all of SVs billionaires we see that they tend to favor Democratic candidates.

Actions speak louder than words. Endorsing a democratic candidate while paying your warehouse employees barely enough to survive without food stamps doesn't exactly quality you for "liberal of the year."

> i think it's because these ultra-wealthy folks can extract their needs from (aka corrupt) any politician. D vs R doesn't really matter much.

This is 100% true, and also why I did not/do not support Hilary Clinton for any elected office.

yeah. rich Democrats are not always so liberal with their own cash. but they can still drape themselves in the cloak of the "socially liberal," whatever that means and for whatever it's worth.

of course, even that idealism may evaporate if it means an intelligent, meritorious poor or disadvantaged student might take the place of a favored son at an elite university.

are the wealthy really "D" or "R" at all? it seems to me they're "W" first and foremost. also narcissistic. really narcissistic. presidentially narcissistic.