November is approaching, which means that the election season is drawing closer. The year began with the entertainment of the Presidential debates, but now the fight between the Democratic and Republican nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump respectively, is growing tenser by the day.

Both candidates have become very interesting representations of a divided country, with Trump tapping into fears and prejudices while Clinton platforms herself as a voice for social justice. Excluding party extremists that will always vote along party lines, the masses are slowly accepting Clinton and Trump as the two "best options" for President of the United States, which is a troubling dialogue for us Americans to be engaging in. It's a wonder why Clinton and Trump are the final contenders, with the public's unease at the idea of either being the figureheads of our nation, yet it's pretty clear why it's down to these two.

To put it bluntly, the fact that the primary candidates are Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is an expression of our American selfishness; rather than looking for a candidate that can represent the country as a whole, most Americans look for someone who can be the closest reflection of themselves. We live in an "all-or-nothing" culture where the goal is to win or go down fighting so, in the eyes of the majority, compromise is a sign of defeat because you're only getting some of what you want. Why vote for someone who can negotiate between the dominant Republican and Democratic parties when you can vote for someone who more strongly represents you?

Clinton and Trump are the products of American voting behavior. Moderates are generally ruled out because both primary candidates tend to be two sides of a political coin, with each face representing a polar extreme. So now the race for the presidency is a settling game between two candidates that many are unsure of. It can be summarized as a choice over the lesser of two evils, which is problematic. "Which of the two is less of a liar?" should not be the deciding factor for the President of the United States, yet that's an actual conversation dominating social media, arguably the largest resource for candidate research and debate.

We as a people are no longer choosing a President based on their qualifications; instead, the focus is on how the opponent's lack of qualifications further disqualifies them. From Trump's hand size to Clinton getting sick, minuscule details become trending national stories because a candidate's potential flaws are more appealing for the public. Most social media sites report their latest gaffes as front page news, yet discussion on their policies are next-to-none.

As the Presidential debates approach, questions for the sole goal of audience entertainment are kept to a bare minimum, if not omitted entirely, in order to keep our search for the better candidate serious. Yes, the choices now seem to be between a corrupt politician (compared to an honest one...?) and an insensitive egomaniac, but political mess is the result of how we as Americans vote; the next time around, hopefully we as Americans can change the dialogue and look for someone who can represent the nation, not as that of the extreme left or right, but represent as much of America's ideals as possible.