With Bernie Sanders advancing in early polling, Elizabeth Warren snubbing big donors, and Howard Schultz transformed into a punch line, the Wall Street moneymen who once dominated Democratic politics have been questioning their continued relevance. If Sanders, a 77-year-old socialist from Vermont, can raise $10 million from nearly 360,000 people in less than one week, doesn’t that call into question the role played by Wall Street bundlers and their networks of like-minded millionaires?

“Money people aren’t relevant anymore,” says one such donor, who is duly impressed by what Sanders has accomplished in the money-raising department. “It’s unbelievable, and you can’t diminish it,” he said, noting how the Vermont senator has expanded his power base. In 2016, Sanders was a radical: a party outsider who ran against the Democratic establishment. Now, he’s got new allies in Congress—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ro Khanna among them—and the Democratic Party has largely adopted his platform. “He can say, ‘Hey, I was ahead of the game, and now look: everyone’s coming my way. But I was the leader,’” he continued. “Having a two-year head start on a presidential race shows that he understood what he needed to do both digitally and for his grassroots. And what’s amazing—it’s not only the money. Forty percent of the people are new people who weren’t with him before. It’s incredible.”

Robert Zimmerman, a longtime member of the Democratic National Committee and the co-founder of an eponymous communications firm, agreed. “Park Avenue cocktail parties are being replaced by coffee shops in Bensonhurst and Astoria,” he said. “That Internet donor class has a prominent seat at the table, and has been empowered quite dramatically. It’s a different dynamic and long overdue.”

Not everyone is so enamored of the party’s rapid swing to the left. Among the $1,000-a-plate fund-raising set, there are plenty of otherwise-liberal elites who have their doubts about doubling the top marginal tax rate. Many had high hopes for billionaire Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who has reportedly promised to spend $500 million or more to ensure that Donald Trump is evicted from the White House. But, these people fear, the pained reaction to Starbucks billionaire Howard Schultz “has ruined the opportunities” for other rich white men to enter the race. Whether or not Schultz goes through with his plans to seek the presidency as an independent, he appears to have blown up the runway for his private-jet-owning colleagues.

Bloomberg, of course, was already the most Hamlet-like of presidential teases. To run or not to run is the question Bloomberg has been asking for years—and one that has kept his advisers well fed. Not since Mario Cuomo left two chartered planes hanging on the runway at Albany County airport in December 1991 has a potential candidate been so overly analytical and indecisive. Just run, his many supporters on Wall Street have been urging for months now. (Warren Buffett, whose net worth exceeds Bloomberg’s by about $25 billion, has said he would support Bloomberg.) But, at the moment anyway, thanks to Schultz, it’s looking less and less likely that Bloomberg will actually pull the trigger. What was once looking like a February announcement is increasingly looking like no announcement at all. Bloomberg and his long-term girlfriend, Diana Taylor, were recently spotted spending time at the Winter Antiques Show, with their decorators in tow, instead of in Iowa knocking back kielbasas.

Without Bloomberg in the race, the thinking goes, Joe Biden would have a wider lane to run as the party’s signature Establishmentarian—a safe, friendly face amid a horde of lefties agitating for a wealth tax, or worse. While Hillary Clinton dominated the Democratic primary during the 2016 cycle, sources familiar with Biden’s strategy say he is realizing that to be competitive this time around, no candidate needs more than 15 to 20 percent of the vote in any primary to land in the top three. Biden’s thinking, “Hey, it’s hard to see that with my name recognition, and people thinking I’m the most electable, that I don’t come in that top three,” said the Wall Street bundler. “I mean, I think he sees a different lane now than he’s seen in the past, when there’s no Hillary Clinton at 65 percent, or whomever it may be. It makes for a very different race.”