Aristotle Part 1

On what basis does Aristotle reject the life devoted to honor and political success? Hardly anything is said about this, which I think is a big mistake. Why is this life still better than the pleasure-seeking one, anyways? We already noted that Aristotle immediately dismisses the hedonistic life, and then claims "practical" political activity the second best kind of life a person can lead. What makes political activity "practical" in the first place, when it is well known that so much corruption surrounds politics? And, knowing this, why is it still better than going about the hedonistic life? Is a life devoted to impractical political activity worse than one devoted to pleasure? And what does he mean when he talks about a life devoted to pleasure? Must pleasure always be a bad thing? What if someone felt great pleasure by helping other people, and that person devoted his/her life to that? Would that person's life be more unfulfilled than a politician? I think Aristotle make a great mistake when he only identifies three different types of lives, because there are many other ways to live your lives which might be just as good. Furthermore, I don't think most people only live in one way. That is, that they would devote their lives solely to one thing, such as reflection, politics, or pleasure. I think most people can live very fulfilled lives with any combination of those three things, or with others. I think that Aristotle cut himself off prematurely.