I agree with most of what you wrote, particularly with the thesis that freedom of speech, etc may be seen to be superior to voting alone. However these very rights are in danger of becoming a theory when the two major parties listen less and less to the people. The door for citizen participation is reduced to symbolic acts when two parties put corporate voices before people.

The role of Nader or any third party running is not so much about winning here, but at the very least, it should remind us of our intrinsic unwillingness to settle with a second best. I fear that if we become too habituated and comfortable with picking the lesser evil on the mere grounds of being practical, we may overlook what is possible.

Nader makes a bad president and I echo your predilection for a more administratively capable candidate. The exclusion of Nader however, would excuse the absence of issues that the other leading candidates have comfortably ignored.