How much more, and how much of an advantage? Like blaming the debates, that shifts all responsibility off the candidate. You're subject line is another example of this. To say any culpability for the weakness of Nader's campaigns lie with the candidate himself is a "phobia."
Is Nader's campaign turning people off? If so, why? Why can't Nader pick up former Perot voters? During his 2000 campaign, I worked with several Reform party folks who supported Nader. A local group of Reformers actually endorsed him. The overlap is there, but he's not getting much out of it.
There is a tendency for marginal groups to assume that the only reason they aren't winning is because they haven't been heard by enough people. You're assumption about campaign millions, for example. So, they fixate on the need to be louder, never admitting that much of their target audience may simply be tuning them out.
There is a complex mix of what needs to be done. Reframe the debates, build institutions to challenge the duopoloy, raise the necessary funds, organize a constituency, and retool failed tactics. Many defenses of Nader invoke all but the last of these to dismiss any suggestion that their candidate is doing anything wrong. Repeating the same poor campaign over and over again doesn't aid the other needs; it can even hinder them.
-- Shane
________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!