Think of it like the 2nd amendment for the internet.
Still trying to address a problem that doesn’t exist. The NN rules were a few guys, working in secret, suddenly launching regulations to control the internet for fear that dystopian reality of 2015 internet would never end. I’m more comfortable with private control if the internet than government control. Trump running the internet and deciding what’s “fair” sounds dangerous and, frankly, stupid. The internet of 2017 is pretty much the same as 2015, no noticeable improvement. Why does the government need to control it?
Does anyone else catch that disconnect around the only way to be free is through government control? Orwellian as hell ain’t it? 
When the Obama Admin first started talking up the NN stuff, Glen Beck and others were having a field day pulling up sound bites of various prominent Democratics talking about how they could use NN to help regulate political speech on the internet, and this was back in 2009/2010. And then once more, after the event of Donald Trump being elected, what were the Democrats suddenly talking about? Ways to regulate speech on the Internet.
Net Neutrality is a big deal for Democrats for two reasons: 1) It's their new "Equal Time" project. 2) Silicon Valley, in particular Web-site based tech companies, are major donors to the Democrats in ways that they aren't for Republicans.
Well, I guess that answers my question about the problem being solved. It’s a bit conspiracy theory-ish but it fits.
Doubly so when you also recall that Obama's Campaign Success, in particular against Hillary in the primaries, was largely attributed to
his campaign's effective use of the internet.
And which political party in particular also tends to be the most vocal about placing restraints on campaign activities? (From "unapproved sources" at least)
While it skirts on the edge of tin-foil hat territory, I don't find "the buy in" on the idea that setting up a strong framework, and precedent, for the Government to become deeply involved in the hows and why's of regulating communications over the internet wasn't step 1 of a broader agenda that just saw a setback from this.
But Google, Netflix, Amazon, et al are opposed to this rollback because it has significant potential to hurt their existing business models and their bottom line. So that one isn't a "grand consipiracy" but rather a simple follow the money game.