Point 1: In what context are you using the geography in?
What do you mean? I mentioned IndyCar is North American-centric because, relative to F1, it's concentrated in North America. All of the races are currently in North America. Half of the regular drivers are from North America. All of the teams are North American (except for a one-off partnership with McLaren & Andretti.) I suspect it's fanbase and viewership is strongly North American. In contrast, F1 is completely global (with a strong European bias.)
It's fine to be North American centric, just know that a series with a global footprint is going to have more money, attention, and prestige.
Point 2: This is debatable. Personally I believe no series can ever claim they have the "best" drivers if there exists a team that takes money from a driver.
Of course, this is debatable, especially considering the sheer variety of racing disciplines, but a) I don't think the existence of some pay-to-drive drivers negates the excellence at the top of the field, and b) most IndyCar drivers would kill for an F1 seat (including Rossi,) the reverse isn't true.
Point 3: Yes, the cars are ugly, but that is changing next year.
It looks good in renders, I'll give you that.
Regardless, these three points don't really address the actual racing in IndyCar which doesn't suck at all.
The actual racing is immaterial to my comment. Like I said, lots of series have great racing. But until you get the best drivers on a global stage, a series isn't going to win the prestige and reputation of F1 and "suck" in comparison.