Since the founding of this country our service members have made great sacrifices in the name of FREEDOM. The lockdowns and mandates imposed by our government has been a slap in the face to anyone who made that sacrifice. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. It has PLENTY to do with our military.
People are being told what level of risk to be ok with and some are following like sheep. Others have decided that a 99% survival rate is not worth the measures taken. For some reason, the media and government are demonizing those that took their 'No Fear' t-shirts from the 90's seriously. They are telling you to value the lives of certain groups of people (elderly and immunocompromised) over other groups of people (young, healthy, and those with mental health issues). You would think that we would have learned by now that forcing people to value one group of people over another has dire consequences. Just a few examples from recent history that has been a result of this type of behavior: Civil Rights protests, women's rights marches, protests against the police, march on Wall Street, etc.
Stock prices for Pharma skyrocketed once Obama took office as well. Good thing we were so busy complaining about the top 1% during that time. Wait...who really benefited most from Obamacare?? Oh whoopsies...the top 1%.
Let's be honest...Bloomberg was an extremely shitty candidate that tried to buy his way into the primary after it was well underway. But you make a good point...he did manage to BUY himself into the debates, which would be a huge step for a 3rd party. The funding from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund are dulled out based on the percentage of votes received during the prior election. So more votes=more money, as long as you reach 5%. $10 million would be on the low end of what they would receive.
Gary Johnson was polling at 10% in 2016 by the time the debates rolled around and they excluded him even though he was on the ballot in pretty much every state. Who knows what would have happened if he had the funds. Perhaps the 2020 election wouldn't be just a creepy, old white guy vs. a creepy, old white guy. The system is rigged in favor of the 2 continuously polarizing parties...clearly. Since I have kids, I'm trying NOT to be shortsighted and am voting for better options for their future. I'm aware that this will not happen overnight, but that does not mean we shouldn't try. All I can say is: If you keep voting for the lesser of 2 evils, then don't complain when evil is elected.
$10 million would be the low end of what they would receive which could buy a lot of exposure. It would double the amount that Gary Johnson's campaign raised in 2016. They could actually afford TV ads. They could actually make the debate stage and really change the discussions that people are having. The last 3rd party candidate to actually have money was Ross Perot, who did fairly well for a 3rd party candidate. A better candidate could do even better than he did. It's not a worthless vote. It's actually worth a lot more than any of Hillary's losing votes that she (according to your meme) paid $4 billion for.