neither Hilary nor trump light my fire. I wish we could bring Lincoln back.
There are third-party candidates. See if Johnson or Stein interest you.
We’ve been spoiled by Obama. Most races, however, consist of candidates that are pretty average. This year’s POTUS race has one a little above, and one quite far below, the average.
We brought Jerry Brown back, and that worked out pretty darn well, overall. One of the best things ever to happen to California. Pity he’s a bit too old to be a Presidential contender.
If Jerry Brown’s too old, what about Lincoln?!
I’ve been a voter since 1980. Voted in every major election and most minor ones. In all that time there have only been two candidates I liked; the rest of the time I was voting “lesser of two evils.” So, OP, you have to decide which is the lesser of two evils, or if any of the third party candidates appeal to you.
If you want to completely waste your vote. I suggest you rethink what you dislike about Hillary, do some research and see if it’s really true. If you’re worried about Benghazi! ™, don’t be. The longest investigation in Congressional history turned up diddly squat. She’s a centrist Democrat, much like Obama. Since Obama has been an above average president, expect much the same from Hillary.
Personally I like Clinton a lot and dislike Trump intensely but that is neither here nor there. You are entitled to your on opinion.
Assuming that neither lights your fire the question you still have to answer is which one being president, in your assessment, would be better for the country and for the world. If you honestly conclude that they would be of the same consequence then vote for a third party in protest or to make some point. If you think that one is greater risk of harm for our population, for the future of the country, and for the world, then vote accordingly even if neither one excites you. This aint no torrid love affair, it is the future of the planet.
Pray that Clinton is recommended for indictment and that Trump gets defeated in a fight at the republican convention (possible IF republicans vote to free their delegates to vote any way they want on the first ballot which is something actually being considered…albeit a longshot).
Knowing that the Benghazi hearings produced bupkis against Clinton you should realize that the email thing is still not a sure thing, and then if that recommendation does not happen what was the main reason available now to not vote for Clinton goes up in smoke too?
Speaking of 3rd party candidates:
Long shots I agree.
Benghazi was clearly politically motivated though. As far as I know no law enforcement agency was looking at it.
For the emails the FBI has been spending an awful lot of time investigating it and if you have paid attention to recent developments there seems to be reason for Clinton to worry.
People at her level (regardless of party) are very, very hard to hold accountable.
Again…long shots but this is not over. If she wins watch republicans go to town finding ways to impeach her (they will probably start with the Clinton Foundation).
EDIT to add: I will have to look but limited by the edit time I am pretty sure the mishandling of documents does not require criminal intent to be guilty of the crime. Which is to say if you email yourself a top secret document to your AOL account with no intent other than to work on it at home you are still guilty of a crime.
Thankfully, there is so far, no evidence at all anything like that happened.
Oh like when they told us that hundreds were now investigating? That was poppycock.
Not sure about that one either. It may be the case sometimes but there is a lot more stretching of what a crime is in this case.
Even before 2014, however, it seems quite clear that the 2009 language and follow up cables from the State Department indicate she did not adhere to proper protocol. But there is a colossal difference between “wrong,” “improper” or even a regulation violation, and a federal crime.
Conclusion
To be clear, none of this means Clinton won’t be charged. There may be a trove of non-public evidence against her about which we simply do not know. It’s also possible that the FBI recommends charges and federal prosecutors decide not to move forward as occurs in many cases. No question, that could create an explosive and politicized showdown. But based on what we do know from what has been made public, there doesn’t seem to be a legitimate basis for any sort of criminal charge against her. I fear many commentators are allowing their analysis to become clouded by a long standing distrust, or even hatred of Hillary Clinton.

If Jerry Brown’s too old, what about Lincoln?!
Too anti-gun.
Get past the superficial images and learn what the candidates are actually likely to do as President.

Too anti-gun.
Lol +1
Hillary has got this in the bag. Granted, she’s no saint but she’s better than Trump.

Pray that Clinton is recommended for indictment and that Trump gets defeated in a fight at the republican convention …
Oh? And then we get Ted Cruz, the evangelical wingnut whose main legislative agenda is degrading America’s credit rating, versus the one-issue white-haired man whose executive experience was being the mayor of a small town. No thanks.

I wish we could bring Lincoln back.
Lincoln was a creation of slavery and civil war, just like any leader is a creation of their times. We are in relative peace and prosperity, believe it or not, and our leaders are not called upon to be better than they are - because we are the ones who do the calling.
Either Clinton or Trump *will *be the next President. If you think there’s a difference, you have a responsibility as a citizen to act accordingly.

I wish we could bring Lincoln back.
While I agree, I’ll point out his real name is Clarence Williams III.