The op is just a complete mess. The Bloomberg story is a characterization of the NYT article and it doesn't even get it right. The Bloomberg article said:
A select group of rich Republican donors has a plan. The New York Times reported Monday that "dozens" of the party's leading fundraisers and donors are quietly discussing a proposal to back one candidate in an effort to marshal their support behind a sole establishment candidate in an effort to avoid pitting billionaire backers against one another in a costly primary battle.
That is not why this plan is being considered. What the NYT reports is:
Dozens of the Republican Party’s leading presidential donors and fund-raisers have begun privately discussing how to clear the field for a single establishment candidate to carry the party’s banner in 2016, fearing that a prolonged primary would bolster Hillary Rodham Clinton, the likely Democratic candidate.
But the reality of all three candidates vying for support has dismayed the party’s top donors and “bundlers,” the volunteers who solicit checks from networks of friends and business associates. They fear being split into competing camps and raising hundreds of millions of dollars for a bloody primary that would injure the party’s eventual nominee — or pave the way for a second-tier candidate without enough mainstream appeal to win the general election.
The NYT article does not mention having the goal of an "establishment" candidate. What it does mention is that the reason for considering this is to save from a repeat of last election process where Republicans were beating each other up, during the primary, and leave a Republican candidate moving into the national election against the Democrat already damaged from the primary.
While I do not believe this is the right way to handle it I do believe it is prudent to take a look at this issue and how to handle it. In other words this is not a bad thing to take a look at.
The op and the title taken from the bloomberg article gives the impression that greedy rich republicans are trying to just take over the voting process to make things go their way.
Also, in neither the Bloomberg article or the NYT article does it mention anything about the so called
"conservative activist Supreme Court for taking 99.9% of Americans and the political parties from having a say in who will be the GOP 2016 presidential candidate."
I believe this is a good discussion to have to figure out how better to get a Republican candidate through the primary in good shape for the national election.
As far as the GOP being the party of the rich that is just disingenuous. Let's not pretend that the Dem party does not have any rich doners.
