Isn't is similar to Carter being depicted as a 'weak president' because he had more progressive ideas than an average US president, which make similar amount of sense.. and hence best ridiculed as a threat to "greed is good" prevailing ethos.

He was depicted as weak because during his time an entire US embassy was held hostage in Iran for more than a year. Couple that with inflation reaching 14.8% and now you understand why.

Porque no los dos?

He was a super-rich guy, who had had too many people telling him he was a genius for way too long (reminds you of anybody?), and so was way too sure of himself. A bunch of his ideas were crazy, which doesn't mean others weren't trying to dismiss his views.

> A bunch of his ideas were crazy

Which ones?

btw young idealistic me voted for Perot in 1992

I too would like to know.

All shoe sizes should only be small, medium, and large. He really did have a lot of very ridiculous ideas. He also had a lot of extremely good ideas and incredible understanding of socioeconomic conditions.

His book “United We Stand” with modern context is quite amazing considering it came out in the early 90s.

Powerful people like those who control both parties and our news media don’t tolerate outsiders. When you have the power any deviation from status quo is a threat. A side effect of this is that voters stop listening to the talking heads and politicos when they call some political outsider a dangerous loon even when that may be a valid point.

I’m not directing that last sentence at the president or RFK, but I’m guessing that’s the reason for the downvotes?

The POW stuff was actual insanity

If you're interested and aren't willing to take OP's word for it, the 90s are recent enough that you can probably read contemporary news articles/opinions pieces about him online (and almost certainly at your library). You can also read up on his views/life on Wikipedia.