Ralph Nader Blames Hillary For SCOTUS Immunity Ruling

Nothing like watching Democratic neurosis hit a fever pitch, but Ralph Nader has truly popped a vessel with this one. Plus, I’m not sure if “Democrat” describes him, but loon does. We have not had a good few days, friends. It all started out with the Thursday debate, which the MSM then seized upon like a juicy bone and they’ve been running with it in their slavering jaws for all that it’s worth. Today there’s a list of Biden replacements being assembled for an open convention, if you believe a lot of outlets. Not happening. But it’s a good conspiracy theory and that’s the temper of the times in which we live.

Following the debate debacle, we have this morning’s SCOTUS ruling on immunity. That is not making people happy, either. But I must say, I think some kind of an award should go to none other than Ralph Nader for having broadcast the most batshit reaction to the past few days that we have seen. I hope that this is not the shape of things to come between now and November.

Oh, GO FUCK YOURSELF, you goddamn sanctimonious piece of shit.

— Jon Cooper (@joncoopertweets) July 1, 2024

I must say, that out of some fifty, sixty reactions to the SCOTUS ruling that this is the most koo koo for coca puffs one that I have seen and I most certainly was not expecting it to come from Ralph Nader. WTH is he reacting to? Some bad acid he dropped many decades ago and which is now causing flashbacks of a most unpleasant sort? But since we’re here, and we need to find some causal connection between how we woke up in a democracy this morning and will be going to bed in a plutocracy tonight (if you would believe what you read) we might as well start with Hillary.

First of all, having had the benefit of the past eight years or so to ruminate on the 2016 election, I’m not sure Hillary could have done anything different. She was a deeply compromised candidate going in. Both Bill and Hillary were the darlings of what was called the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy for about twenty years. They were both miscast, misconstrued, misperceived and openly lied about. That’s a lot of baggage.

And everything negative stuck to Hillary as a result of that baggage. Every. Thing. I’m not sure that the Hillary campaign could have done much to undo that, but granted, they could have addressed it head on and not pretended that it didn’t exist. It did exist, and that along with bot farms in Russia, where trolls on Facebook pretended to be the neighbors, gave Donald Trump a very effective cess pool in which to grow his unique brand of a toxic campaign.

Also, as a final note on the Hillary campaign: the Democrats were bitterly divided. I was of the opinion that Bernie Sanders would have been the more effective candidate. Granted, Sanders would most likely have not been as good of a president as Hillary would have been but I completely believed then (and still believe) that he would have been more effective as a foil against Trump. That is where we made a very bad strategic mistake as a party.

But make it we did and so we were stuck with what was, unfortunately, a ludicrous choice on the side of both parties, the Republicans with their TV show clown and the Democrats with their much-maligned and demonized candidate — who carried the extra burden of being female. Hillary was hated. I’m not saying it was just. It was not. But if anybody tells you that the right-wing conspiracy was ineffective, they are wrong. It was very effective and the woman was loathed and despised.

As Democrats we made two decisions in 2016: yes, we nominated the most qualified candidate that we had and that’s a good thing. We also didn’t nominate the most strategic candidate that we had, which was Bernie Sanders. Sanders would have been a far better tactical and strategic choice against Trump. But we did not make that choice.

So I think that once we chose the Hillary path, all things considered, how loathed the woman was and how after eight years of Obama the political pendulum was set to swing back into the Republican column anyway, Trump had all the advantages going for him and we had all the disadvantages going for us.

I don’t know what Ralph Nader would have had Hillary do differently. But he’s not saying and he’s catching hell, that’s for sure.

We can go back to 2000, which is one of my favorites, and talk about how Nader running cost Al Gore the presidency — which I don’t believe, personally. Al Gore was a terrific candidate. The issue at that time was, again, what I call the political pendulum. It was ready to swing back into the Republican column after eight years of Bill Clinton. That was what did Gore in, that and Bill’s idiocy with Monica and the blue dress, all that madness. But for the scandal, Gore might have done a George H.W. and squeaked in, giving us 12 years in a row of Democratic rule. At least, theoretically, that’s possible.

We can theorize in one hand and pee in the other and we’re never going to know. I don’t know what got Nader into blasting off into the social media void today but he certainly did nothing to help the matter of the SCOTUS ruling, only to muddy the waters even further.

Hillary Clinton was not at the right place at the right time. Donald Trump was. I think that historians may well conclude this in decades, if not centuries, to come. Meanwhile, we need to keep our eyes on the prize and win in November.

Support the site with a subscription today and see no more ads!

Go Ad-free Now!