The 2016 Presidential Election is similar to picking poison: both options have terrible results, but one is more painful to endure than the other. It is a widely accepted notion that neither Hillary nor Donald is an ideal candidate for the presidency. Many voters feel as though they aren't voting for a candidate, they are voting against the other. This method of thinking is causing what is called an "anti-vote election." An anti-vote election is when voters don't like either candidate, so they vote for the candidate they dislike the least. The 2016 Presidential election candidates have left voters befuddled when it comes to who to vote for, and who to vote against.

There are two things a presidential candidate should be; loyal to our nation and open about their policies. Hillary Clinton has been investigated by the FBI and there is no way to twist this fact whether you are voting for her or not. Many of her supporters argue that "Clinton was not indicted," but that doesn't change the fact that her ability to keep national secrets and loyalty to our country were questioned. Clinton said, "If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn't be able to just go and buy a gun." By that standard, should someone under investigation by the FBI be considered for the presidency? The former senator has a problem protecting the truth, but has no trouble stretching it. Since beginning her senatorial campaign in 2001, Clinton has pandered to the audience she is presenting in front of, instead of being genuine. She is known to change her accent based on the state she is in and using slang words based on the demographic she needs to sway. For example, she believes she has persuaded the older democrat voters, so she often uses pop culture references to gain the attention of the younger citizens. Lastly, Hillary acts as if she is "owed" the presidency. It seems as though since she lost the nomination in 2008 to Barack Obama, she is now entitled to a win. Presidential candidates should work hard for our votes. They should share their policies and ideals and let us decide. Instead, Clinton tries her best to tell us what we want to hear, leading her to stumble over her words and to her speeches to seem disingenuous and forced. If she will say anything to be elected, how can we vote for her not knowing what the truth is?

And then we have Donald J. Trump, or as I like to call him, "The Alternative." In the beginning, Trump caught the eye and won the approval of many. He is an outspoken entrepreneur who brings a fresh face to politics. Then, Trump started making immature and unnecessary comments about the physical appearances and personal relationships of the other candidates. For example, Trump criticized Carly Fiorina, not about her policies but about the way she looked. He said, "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?! I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?" If Donald Trump isn't a decent enough human being to only critique the candidates' policies and ideals, then what type of ethical decisions is he capable of making? On Twitter, Trump retweeted (and then deleted) one of his supporters' post that said,"If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America," and then proceeded to add "@realDonaldTrump #2016President." Not only did Trump think it was OK to publicly shame Clinton for her husband's mistake, but he felt the need to make the tweet a part of his presidential campaign. Donald Trump clearly isn't able to decipher the line between what is appropriate to ridicule and what is not. At this point, many voters, including Republicans, started to see Trump's candid personality as a threat, rather than a positive attribute. What happens if this man has to meet with world leaders? Would he be able to bite his tongue, or would he push our allies too far and create enemies? Is that a chance we are willing to take? Lastly, Trump has difficulty dealing with people who disagree with him. At his rallies, Trump would make fun of anyone who protested or opposed one of his statements. He would proceed to imitate the person, or group, and then kick them out. There was a reporter who wrote an article that represented views different than Trump's; he then made fun of said reporter at his rally in South Carolina. The reporter had a muscular disability and Trump was making fun of the way he moved. If Trump is willing to go this far to mock someone who disagreed with one of his views, could he handle the pressure and ridicule of foreign leaders who don't agree with his policy? Could this hotheaded and easily angered man be our Commander in Chief without causing serious damage to the universal reputation of the United States?

So what can voters who don't support the policies or qualities of Trump and Hillary do? Well, I have good news! There is a third option, and his name is Gary Johnson. Johnson is the former Governor of New Mexico and is the Libertarian nominee. The Libertarian party candidates are often fiscal, or economically, Republicans and socially Democrats. For Johnson to have a fighting chance against Trump and Clinton, it is important for him to appear at the Presidential debates. How do we get him there? In order for Johnson to be considered by the Commission on Presidential debates, or the CPD, he needs to meet two requirements. First, he needs to poll at 15 percent or higher in the "national electorate." He is currently polling at 10 percent. Also, Johnson must be on a "sufficient number of state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning the majority vote of the Electoral college." Johnson already has his name on 32 of the fifty states' ballots. Could the distrust in the major party candidates lead to a Libertarian finally take office?

This article isn't meant to start fights about policy, the purpose is to outline the characteristics of the two people in line for the presidency. I'm not sorry if I sound pretentious, or if I make it seem as if I'm "above" these candidates. Frankly, I am. And you should be too. I desperately want candidates who care about the well being of the country, and less about themselves. I continue to believe we live in the greatest country in the world, a country that deserves honest and well-tempered leadership. But for now, policy is all we can rely on. So vote for the candidate with views closest to your own and remember that not voting isn't hurting anyone but yourself.

For more information on the policies of each candidate click the link next to their name and get informed.

Hillary Clinton: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

Donald Trump: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/issues

Gary Johnson: http://www.johnsonweld.com/issues