1. Of those on Nader’s list only Tom Golisano has demonstrated he’s got the stomach/fire in the belly for total political battle. Running against the duopoly is all uphill.

   I hope he’d pledge to serve only one term, being almost 80 at the end of that. Also I’d hope he’d let state organizations get various candidates for Vice President to demonstrate the movement is in charge of him not the reverse. More hoping includes a lot of emphasis on electoral reform and less on sheltering rich from taxes. That entire episode with the NY state senate crisis in ’09 which he brought on with his wealth shows his fire but was costly to the state even as it tested it.

   Golisano could be that vital interim between rejecting the duopoly and identifying a democracy vision and leader.

   Things are indeed bad when the call goes out to a “Modestly enlightened rich person” as everything is rigged, only money can inspire hope.

   And happy birthday Ralph Nader, many more too.

2. Since we know corporate “persons” have first amendment rights, are there any constitutional impediments to running a corporate “person” for president? As long as they incorporated at least 35 years ago, I can see none. Dow Chemical even has a “person” first name! And it (he?) has plenty of money to bankroll a run.

   BTW…Is Dow a Christian or a corporate “person” of some other faith? Any lovers of the Citizens United decision out there who might know?

   Thanks in advance.

3. Actually, Article II suggests that only men can be President. Section 1 says, “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States. He shall hold his Office…”

4. Good point!

   So only male corporate “persons” can be president, then.

   And you’ve given Scalia a novel originalist basis for telling Hillary to pound sand if she runs and manages to win.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.