If you want politics as usual, crony insider deals, unaccountable politicians who are only interested in enriching themselves at the cost of the taxpayer then hillary is your candidate.

nah. with Hillary you get far more. a trail of dead bodies, flagrant treason, and childish excuses. Hillary is not politics as usual. she adds an extra flair.

Hillary may have to debate Jill Stein as she is closing in on numbers to be on the ticket.

Wow Ralph. It's been all downhill since the Corvair

He is like the uncle who won't take a hint that it's time to leave!!

I voted my own political conscience when I voted for militant socialist Peter Camejo of the Socialist Workers Party in 1976. Years later I still voted my political conscience when I voted for the Green Party presidential team of Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo. That remarkable old radical Peter ( author of 60s cult classic pamphlet : " How to Make A Revolution in the United States " ) likened himself to a watermelon - green on the outside, red on the inside " ).
Like Nader I have been a critical supporter of " socialist " Democrat Bernie Sanders. I don't see how his " political revolution " can endorse " Harpy Wall St. Hillary ", the Queen of the Status quo.
In contrast to neo-Democrat devotion to fatuous " identity politics " , true democratic socialists will focus on the issue of unacceptable economic inequality in capitalist America.
They focus on economic class issues.If you feel well connected to the ONE PERCENT , you can vote your class interests by voting either for Hillary or " The Donald " .Racialism will get you nowhere in the 2016 presidential election.
As Ralph Nader said again and again both major parties represent and serve Corporate America.
But clearly Hillary Clinton is presently the favorite of Wall St. and the Pentagon.

How many people do you think a SoCom would have to kill in the US to make SoCom really really work. SoCom Mao did 60 million, SoComFascist Hitler some 40 million, Pol Pot 3 million. Would 295,000,000 be a number in the US you could live and die with?

How many working class American voters would die to make the world safe for greedy, world destroying capitalism - or sacrifice their children for Ayn Rand's " Virtue of Selfishness " ? Democratic socialists hear this craven nonsense all the time. It is pretty tired. What is the atrocity record for numerous. pro-capitalist fascist leaders -backed by U.S. imperialism ?
Why not just VOTE American capitalism out of existence ?

Because in biology, the parasite survives by feeding off the host. But if the parasite takes too much from the host, the host becomes too weak to support both and they both die. Or the host dies and the parasite must find another host. If the parasite runs out of hosts, the parasite dies also.
In social sciences, someone must produce -host- in order for recipients -parasites- to live.
Voting capitalism out of existence means the parasites kill all the hosts. Then the parasites turn on each other.
Observe Venezuela.

Karl Marx notified Charles Darwin that his theory of biological evolution was the materialist basis for understanding the human social order. For Marx the only scientific view of human social evolution viewed the capitalist class as social parasites -which working class revolution will remove.
The global capitalist class does not permit " socialist " experiments in any country. It actively tries to sabotage them making the false comparison of socialism to a perpetual motion machine - that must always and forever fail miserably.
The ruling class has hired an army of corrupt intellectuals to defend its economic and political system. Indeed right wing Talk Radio sings praises to Ayn Rand every minute of the day.
What can be said positive about a system that brings war and misery to millions and can only be defended by lies and brutality ?
The only problem with Venezuelan " socialism " is that it was not militant enough.You do not call yourself " socialist " and let the rich people keep their bank accounts -or their capitalist private property rights. Lenin got it right with the Russian Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.

I see a stick lying on the ground. I also see a rock. Nobody cares about them, so I pick them up. I sharpen the stick with the rock and now I have a spear. The spear is the fruit of my labor and it is my property. If others now want my stick, they must compensate me for the effort I put into transforming the stick to a spear.
That is capitalism. Raw materials are transformed into property through labor. The only thing that gives the object value is the effort put into it.
What you are advocating is that if I have the ability to transform a stick into a spear, I have an obligation to transform many sticks into many spears so that everybody has one but I am not allowed to trade my spears for something of equal value. If I am going to be hamstrung by your conditions, I will not make any spears at all.
In addition, "socialism" is everybody agreeing to the conditions of socialism. When somebody does not agree with the conditions, he should be forbidden from participating. For all the "socialists" in this country, I have no problem with them carving out a corner of the city, state, country or the globe to run their experiment. If I choose not to participate, will they let me not participate or will they force me to participate? I gather that non-participation is not an option if you were running things because your post said that the Venezuelan "socialism" was not militant enough. If that is the case, I refuse to participate and you will have to kill me. You will lose one mouth to feed and you potentially lose someone who can produce more than he consumes.
In my circle of acquaintances, I will have a hard time finding someone who will shed tears about you and other socialists who want to abandon capitalism and run your own commune. Just out of curiosity, how many communes from the 1960s and 1970s are still around because everybody participating in the commune worked their equal share for the good of the community? In return, you should shed no tears if I do not want to participate in the commune. You should even be glad that such a differing opinion is not in your commune to stir up unrest. But according to your post, you would be angered with my refusal to participate in your commune. You would have to kill me because I would refuse to participate. Tell me who is advocating brutality for an ideal? If you find a way to keep me alive and force me to participate in your commune, who is enslaving another for an ideal? If you manage to enslave me for an ideal, who is the corrupt intellectual?

Socialism begets selfishness....an absolute irony.

if you can't posit the difference - to individual's freedoms and quality of life - by comparing any socialist/communist nation to the states, then you're a hopeless fool, a nihilist, or both. take a look at venezuela as the most recent example of human suffering at the hands of your innately oppressive ideology...

Nobody can order millions of working class people to revolt - violently or peacefully- against capitalist class oppression. They can choose LEADERS .
History shows that privileged classes are well prepared to slaughter rebellious " slaves " .
The masses do not fear death-not even by the millions . Recall the Great French Revolution of 1789 ?

Back to the question: How many dead would you approve to install SoCom. Answer the question, don't divert.

Please don't hold your breath waiting. I'm guessing that ol' billy ayres 25,000,000 sent to the "re-education camps" of the late 70s would be 50-75 million murdered by the socialists/communists- if we are stupid enough to let ourselves be disarmed.

Johnson ru 4 real the mans a complete GOOFBALL

Sanders set Clinton up for political betrayal? Only if Clinton is lying about commitment to her policies, imagine that!
Distrusted disliked lying Clinton is setting the nation up for a trump presidency if she is foolishly nominated in an election year that is demanding change.

Ralph Nader? I thought he was dead. I was half right: He is brain dead. A five time presidential candidate would get the hint that no one is really listening to what he is saying. The mastermind Bernie wilmbenefitband grow a civic kovement? He could not convince his own party to vote for him but he is going to lead a revolution? Thatnis funny.

Nader has long 'spoken out' about the evils of corporate America.

The one part of "corporate America" Nader has never, ever criticized?

Trial Lawyers.

Of which he's one!

Strange ...

You are wrong. Ralph Nader is not afraid to criticize any group of professionals. Not sure where all these bashing commentators are coming from in your criticism. What have you done to bring about change in this country? Among thousands of activist consumer protection groups, Ralph is a role model and a hero. Name me one American who has done more in their lifetime for consumer rights and safety issues than Ralph Nader? His weekly Radio Hour guests are important contributors to critical thinking about the problems of our day. it is dialogue you will hear nowhere else. Shame on you!

What have I done to bring about 'change'?

I supported Dr. King in 1963-4-5-6 when he was marching and preaching for civil rights! What were you doing then?

I sat quietly while a far less qualified black engineer was promoted instead of me, so as to add 'diversity'. I thought then that if the black community were to advance, they needed positive role models and that took precedence over my feelings. And that was for naught, because the black community is worse off today than in my youth; before 75% of black children are born to single parent households and their fathers nowhere to be found ... until the child is involved in criminal activity; is killed, and then 'Dad' appears in front of the media cameras to tell us what model citizen the child was!

I most likely have paid more in income taxes than you've ever made!

As to Ralph Nader: His analysis of the Corvair was so much Bovine Excrement! It was a rear engine car, so it had oversteer instead of the traditional American front end heavy understeer.

Ralph Nader pioneered the "no matter what stupidity you engage in, there's someone somewhere that you can sue, and a trial lawyer that will take the case for a minimum of 45%" mentality that has driven jobs and manufacturing off shore, not to mention the millions spent in developing and purchasing products that STILL are not "idiot proof" because "idiots" will find a way to hurt themselves.

BRAVO!!!

i was hoping he was dead and then this damn article appears...

He is one of the voting dead.

Sad that Nader would consider Johnson, someone who is against many of the social programs that Nader once supported. Sad that he didn't give a wholehearted support to Jill Stein who is an awesome progressive candidate. Sad!

ironically, a johnson vote elects hillary. so by nader's logic, the best result IS choosing the least-worst candidate... it's so damn obvious. but, leftist's love the drama and nihilism more than rational, objective thought because it fills them with a false sense of power.

Oh, sob. Whine. Snivel. Boo-hoo. Tears galore.

This is pretty funny….Ralph Nader is actually saying that Sanders could benefit? Does Ralph not know that Bernie Sanders has never worked a real job in his life, that representing his little New England state in D.C. is the first bona fide job Bernie the Socialist (aka communist) has ever had? NOTHING will benefit Bernie Sanders. He is a little never-was. That's all he will ever be.

add malicious hatred for America, insatiable greed, a career of crime, and absolute dishonesty, and you have described Hillary.

you forgot her screechy witch voice...

sorry. I will remember the witch voice next time.

"Does Ralph not know that Bernie Sanders has never worked a real job in his life, "

Neither has Nader. They have that in common ...

That's not true- Nader was a, um, well he, Oh dammit, I give up- you're right.

LOL! Thanks for the laugh!

Anyone remember the people who followed Ralph Nader when he urged his supporters that “Bush and Gore are the same anyway so vote for me”. Nader was wrong by about 500,000 dead people. His logic is flawed and listening to him will usher in a 2nd disaster.

There will be no heroes and no villains to blame if we let Trump win – there will only be victims.

What ever happened to allowing 3rd party candidates in the presidential debates? Ralph Nader has a good point.

Bernie is my first choice. Keep in mind, Super Delegates do not commit political suicide until July 25th. If they vote for Hillary's corruption and war, we will vote them out. We are supporting Jill Stein now to let the Democrats know that Hillary is not our plan B and never will be.

The only risk I see with voting for Jill is that Hillary might win. Come November if voting for Jill looks like too much of a risk, I will hold my nose and vote for Trump. #NeverHillary

Hillary's wars and Regime Change agenda are far worse that Trump's big mouth. Hillary is not the lesser evil. Trump is.

Super Delegates have until July 25th to figure this out. We are taking names.

That is exactly how I wanted the republican primary to take place. This is the convention week and there were 20? candidates originally? So, twelve weeks ago -six intervals of two weeks- the bottom four vote getters would have been dropped. Ten weeks ago, the bottom eight vote getters would have been dropped from the ballot. Eight weeks ago, the bottom four vote getters would have been dropped. Six week ago, the bottom two vote getters would have been dropped. Four weeks ago, there would have been a run-off between the remaining two.
So, the rules going in would be:
By January 1 of an election year, you must be registered with the RNC to be on the ballot. After January 1, you will not be considered as a candidate.
At two week intervals -number of intervals to be decided by the number of candidates running- each state will hold run-off elections. At each election, the top half of the candidates will be on the subsequent ballot and the bottom half will be eliminated.
Why do things this way? If your favorite candidate is still in it, you will vote for your favorite candidate. If your favorite candidate falls off the ballot, you vote for your second favorite. This way you still have a voice all the way up to the primary runoff.

Read a few presidential biographies. Some of the biographers go into detail as to how the parties chose their candidates. States elect delegates. Delegates go to the convention and have sworn loyalty to one candidate. After three rounds of voting at the convention if there is no candidate chosen, new candidates are nominated and voted on.
This common sense approach is similar to the March Madness bracket except it does not pit one specific candidate against another to get to the next round. It just drops the bottom half. The exception is the first round if the number of candidates is not a power of 2 to start.
The first reason this approach is not taken is because it takes the power out of the hands of the party leadership. The people get to choose their candidate, not the leadership. That is the real reason the party leadership is upset about Trump being the candidate. He has never "made his bones" with the leadership. In reality, he is just as big a putz as any of the others.
The second reason is that it takes all the argument out of the equation. Remember the BCS for college football? Remember the arguments about strength of schedule, margin of victory etc.? Those arguments were never found in the March Madness tournament. There was minimal -if any- arguments about the champion being the legitimate champion. Now that college football has a four-team playoff, there is a lot less argument over the champion.
The third reason is related to the second reason. It fixes the problem. Politicians never want to fix a problem. There must be perpetual problems to "work on" instead of solve. If the problem is solved, politicians are out of a job.

I wish I could share your optimism. Getting an addict off heroine or crack is more likely to happen than getting a politician to give up his drug of choice: power.

yep. like most socialists he's just blindly and foolishly committed to socialist tag lines and buzz words... you don't have to be very bright to do that once you memorize the basics. it's frightening that any human mind latches on to this destructive mental disease.

"tag lines and buzz words... you don't have to be very bright to do that once you memorize the basics..."

Exactly like the cliche talking points used by the right too - tax cuts, small gov't, jobs creation. It's the mirror image of the far left's bullshit.