Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Nader on Borders


From a few years ago... Any minimally competent material systems person knows that system interfaces need to be well defined and regulated.





6 comments:

Malmo's Ghost said...

Nader was never a pandering liberal. Like Gale Sayers was to football, his kind will never be seen again. A truly unique, gracious and principled intellectual giant advocating for the average people, which are most of us. Too bad his brand of liberal populism is practically extinct. Sad.

Matt Franko said...

The new generation is incompetent corrupt cheerleaders instead...

Matt Franko said...

btw, lefties still out there en mass this week banging the "xenophobia!" drum....

Malmo's Ghost said...

Matt,

If only the left and Democrats had embraced Nader.....Too late now.

75% of total eligible or non eligible electorate either voted for Trump or stayed home. The 50% of total electorate that failed to register or vote are indifferent to outcome. Thus only 25% of country are pissed at a Trump presidency. The optics that the country is divided isn't exactly correct. Couple this with Republicans controlling both the Senate and House plus most of the governorship's and state houses, and the MSM being in a complete tailspin thanks to the saints at Wikileaks, one can understand the utter dread Democrats are experiencing. Democrat Party is terminally ill.

GOOD!

John said...

Malmo, quite right. Leftwing populism would have taken Congress by storm. Nader was just too far ahead of his time and on a different level intellectually, unlike Bernie who's still too wedded to far too many anti-working class policies. Imagine an honest voter listening to Nader and two other candidates from the other two parties. Nader would win by a country mile. And that's why he had to be kept off the debates and the two parties came together to keep him from running in all the states. Here was the best president working and middle class America never had.

For Nader to have succeeded, he'd have needed the unions behind him, but like the selfish morons they are they supported the candidates who would eventually complete the Reagan revolution of crushing the unions and the working classes. What might have been had only the unions and the left stood behind Nader? I wouldn't have expected many liberals to support Nader. Liberals are more interested in every issue but class and all the things that come with class issues. Liberals are little more than socially liberal conservatives, and duly found their ideal presidents in Clinton and Obama, the hammers of the working classes. True to form, the unions did it again this year and went with Killary, although probably a majority of unionists voted Trump. Trade unionists and the working class bitch and moan their whole lives about having someone like Nader, but cave to Democratic establishment pressure and elect as their nominee the anti-working class candidate. This year, they voted their nominee was someone they clearly despised. And a few months later, they voted to make Trump president, a candidate they'd usually would run away from. And any contest between Nader, Clinton and Trump would have been no contest: KO in the first round to the tall, lanky Lincoln look alike without the beard.

Wouldn't it be nice, for once, just once, for trade unionists and the working class in the Democratic party to vote their conscience and elect as their nominee and as president someone who cares about working America?





Malmo's Ghost said...

John,

My union went 100% in for Clinton and Democrats across the board even though rank and file is split. They've been doing this for years. Very counterproductive.

And an election between Nader and Trump would be easy for me--Nader.
____________________________________________________________________________________


I still think Trump will govern a lot more like a lefty than would Clinton. And another bonus will be deep sixing identity politics.