Except a guy like Gravel managed to get on the debate stage. He also leaked the Pentagon Papers which is more significant than most any "competitive candidate" has done. It also is not easy to say the right things when you are in office, but you can. What has being competitive gotten the left here? Acquiescing to Biden? brutalized by Truman? Anarchism made seditionist?

Becoming governor is not out of the mainstream, but more than that, you can say the right things and not get anywhere in bourgeois electoralism (oh no not the thing the left puts little value into) while causing some change by taking a stand.

People respect that a hell of a lot more than kowtowing to war criminals, and when you get the chance to do something unpopular in DC but that may save lives, you have done more good than all the compromises. I'd rather politicians who cant win president but are willing to put their neck on the line when it matters most, which is kinda the case when it comes to exposing war crimes and framing things correctly.

You really saying we shouldn't be praising that, but instead should really praise bending the knee for no concessions? If you can look at exposing the Pentagon papers and say "hmmm it would've been better to do nothing and then try to pass a bipartisan infrastructure bill that will be gutted first" then I don't know what to tell you except that I am pretty sure the people of Vietnam appreciate the former more than the later, same goes for Iraq.

If competing means murdering families in bombing raids, then you are not talking about a leftist. I'd rather not call child killers my buddies, and I think that higher loyalty to values matters more than "tact" for the sake of scraps and a punch in the gut. But regardless this point is silly to make when the example is the guy who leaked the Pentagon papers, talking about "no one listens to you" in that context is laughable