> No it's not. It explains why he ran for president as a star turn
> rather than building a movement. It explains his paranoia about
> trade, which is way out of proportion to reality. It explains why
> he's such a dismal politician who earned a shrinking share of the
> vote on every outing. It explains why he can't work in coalition with
> anyone. The contrast between him & Rocky Anderson was really striking
> - to be a successful politician you've got to like people and be able
> to connect with them. You can't do that if you're idea of fun is
> staying in your room to read the Federal Register.
I guess it's relevant if you are trying to parse who is going to make a good politician.
Nader would be a terrible politician.
Hence his appeal to many smart people who are tired of charismatic politicians.
The American political system is not interested in having smart people run things, especially smart people who have different ideas than the corporate masters pulling the strings.
That's why we need to tear down the U.S. political system. Not that hard to make the anarchist case for this these days.
Chuck