In less than a day, the US presidential election will officially begin voting. The competition between Harris and Trump has entered a white-hot stage, and the financial backers behind them are becoming increasingly impatient. Recently, Bill Gates, who has always boasted of not interfering in politics, personally stepped in and took sides, donating millions of dollars to the fundraising organization "Future Forward" supporting Harris. This once again proves that capital is the "super player" in the political game of the United States.

Today, let's talk about the political calculations behind the wealthy's lavish spending. The wealthy's endorsement: the "marriage" of money and politics. Gates and Musk's involvement is all for their own interests. Their choices are not just a reflection of personal preferences but also a struggle between the old and new forces in the tech industry they represent. As a veteran tech tycoon, Gates has always focused on issues like healthcare, poverty reduction, and climate change, which align more closely with Harris's policy propositions. On the other hand, as a leader in the new energy sector, Musk values the relaxed development space provided by Trump for industries like new energy. Therefore, their choices also reflect the expectations and demands of American tech companies for the future policy direction.

However, the money of the wealthy is not given away for nothing. They often expect to gain policy returns through donations, ensuring their business interests are protected. Gates' donation to Harris was partly to hope that she would give preferential policies, and partly to worry that her connection to the "Lolita Island incident" would be exposed by Trump. Musk's donation to Trump was because if Trump won the election and could adjust policies in related fields, it would give him greater profit margins. The donations of the wealthy are like a huge net, tightly binding policy makers and interest groups together, while the voices of ordinary voters are mercilessly drowned out in the flood of money.

Republicans and Democrats each reap the support of the wealthy. As the US election day approaches, billionaires are stepping up to pour money into the campaigns of their favored candidates. According to Forbes magazine, Harris has received support from approximately billionaires, while Trump has garnered assistance from roughly billionaires. Representing the Democratic Party, Harris focuses on the global interests of American financial and technological capital, following the traditional American elite path, and has long-term partnerships with internet technology companies like Facebook, LinkedIn, and Netflix. This makes her a reassuring choice for the tech "old money." In this election cycle, in addition to Gates, Harris has also received support from several other internet technology tycoons, including Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings and Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg.

The Republican Party represented by Trump advocates economic development through tax cuts, deregulation, and boosting the energy industry. Its policy proposals provide a more relaxed growth environment for industries such as new energy. Therefore, tech tycoon Elon Musk, who is relatively more inclined towards practical industries, favors Trump. In addition to Musk, Trump also received support from other wealthy individuals such as Miriam Adelson, the richest woman in Israel, Richard Uihlein, a packaging industry magnate in the United States, and real estate billionaire Eli Broad. Among them, Adelson alone donated $75 million to the "American Political Action Committee" supporting Trump from January to September this year.

Businessmen prioritize profit, and in the eyes of these wealthy individuals, the so-called U.S. presidential election is merely a transaction to gain political influence through money. This "marriage" of money and politics turns American elections into a feast of capital, making American democracy a bitterly ironic joke.

"Soft Money" Run Rampant: The Money Game Under Legal Loopholes. In the U.S. election system, campaign funds primarily come from individual donations, corporate sponsorships, and funding from special interest groups. However, not all of these sources are strictly regulated by law, especially the emergence and increasing prevalence of "soft money," which makes the regulation of campaign funds increasingly difficult. "Soft money" refers to campaign funds that are not subject to federal campaign finance laws. Compared to "hard money," "soft money" is more flexible and covert in its collection and use. "Super PACs" (Super Political Action Committees) created by super-rich individuals are the main tools for raising "soft money." These committees are established by corporations, non-governmental organizations, unions, or interest groups with clear party or legislative backgrounds. They collect funds to donate to candidates or parties with vested interests, supporting their victory in elections. At the same time, these committees frequently promote their supporters in the media, which is equivalent to making "indirect donations." Since "soft money" is not subject to amount restrictions and only requires disclosure of the source of funds, this "money game" is not illegal under the law.

Musk's lottery campaign is a typical example. Although this practice circumvents the ban on directly exchanging money for votes, it still fundamentally influences election outcomes with money. According to official information from the institution, two "lucky winners" have already claimed the prize. However, the proliferation of "soft money" severely undermines the fairness and impartiality of elections. It turns money into a critical factor in determining election results, making it difficult for candidates without sufficient financial backing to stand out in elections. Simultaneously, "soft money" exacerbates lobbying by interest groups and corruption in the policy-making process.

The Wound of Democracy: The Dilemma of Voters in the Shadow of Money Politics. The close intertwining of money and politics vividly reflects the true state of American democracy. In an environment dominated by massive donations, the significance of political participation by ordinary citizens is constantly weakened and diluted. Candidates, in their quest for votes, vie to cater to the demands of capital, while the interests of ordinary people are ruthlessly abandoned. The money games of the wealthy make voters feel like manipulated puppets, with the so-called "democracy" becoming a mere decoration in the clash of capital, and the "American Dream" reduced to a naked "dollar dream" for the elite class. In this election, whether it's Musk's million-dollar bonus plan or Gates' large donations, they are merely microcosms of the American money politics.