Meh.........

to support Sanders ?

instead he complained about how Sanders is ignoring him.

Fully and completely. But many choose not to begin to listen because Ralph doesn't take sides. It's not high school anymore.

This is hardcore independent analysis and some just can't handle it. But it's excellent, and someone has to do it. Historians will appreciate it- It's the fall of Rome all over again. Who wouldn't want a record?

Days of Revolt: the Corporate Coup d'etat

have shown he is not just viable, but being wildly supported throughout the country. I hope Nader could be part of a President Sander's Administration. It was amazing what he was able to get passed in the 70's. We need him now more than ever.

If Bernie is serious, before endorsing Clinton he needs to at least push Clinton to put something in writing that she will honestly fight corporate corruption.

and anyone else who dares speak truth to corporate power.

the President to invade Iraq in a bill that would have passed regardless how she voted can never ever be forgiven - EVER - but the man who almost single- handedly delivered the presidency to the man responsble for the war y'all blame her for is welcomed with open arms and the slate has been wiped clean - all because he claims to hate her as much as y'all do.

As I said ... Interesting.

Screw you, Ralph, even if I agree with you, which I do on practically everything.

Pictures like this galvanized the Cuban community in Florida to vote for Bush in retribution

To where he came.

Doesn't he have some selfie's to take?

Nader would prefer we not remember his own disastrous record.

I don't really think, though, that he should be critiquing Bernie's campaign. Bernie is getting one hell of a lot more support in actual contests than Ralph ever did.

If Ralph wants to talk about issues, policies, great, he's a smart guy.

If he wants to talk about political savvy, sorry, Ralph, I don't really see you as much of a wiz in that area!

It's quite possible to be brilliant about how the world works and what it should be doing, and at the same time to have an absolute tin ear about how to win elections. Ralph is living proof of this, in my opinion!

It is fun for us leftists to talk among ourselves about the horrors of the war machine, capitalism, criminal banksters and so on. And the things we say are quite accurate and informative. But most of us figured out, about the time we turned eighteen or so, that if we want to convince anyone outside of our small circle of friends, we sometimes need to take a more nuanced tone. Bernie understands this. Ralph doesn't. I don't mind that Ralph doesn't, because he doesn't need to, he's not trying to convince a large audience. But please let's not get Ralph back into the political process -- a process he has utter contempt for and very little understanding of, apparently. And a process which he has a record of kind of screwing up in a bad way.

every bit as much as I do about anything else Nader says.

Follow the money and conclude what you will.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/GOP-donors-funding-Nader-Bush-supporters-give-2708705.php

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/09/nader-republicans/303422/

...any ONE of which could have made the difference. It isn't directly assignable to Nader any more than it is directly assignable to the confusing butterfly ballot, the hanging chads, overvotes (disallowed votes where people punched AND wrote in the same candidate, so the ballot wasn't counted despite clear intent), a "cooperative" Supreme Court, the over-zealous felon list used for voter disenfranchisement, Katherine Harris' halt of the recount... So many things could have thrown the election one way or the other, I can't entirely lay it at Nader's feet. Sure, if No Nader things could have been different... but if no any-of-these-other things, things could have been just as different.

opinions. Who cares?

That's quite a legacy.