There are alternatives to Trump, Clinton

Almost two of three voters regard Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as untrustworthy.

Each will spend the time until Election Day attacking the other, causing many people to justify their vote as opting for the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two evils, however, is by definition an evil.

Alternatives exist for voters who dislike both Trump and Clinton. If their priorities are smaller government, freer trade, individual freedom and limited foreign engagement, they could vote for the Libertarian Party's Gary Johnson.

If they are sensitive to environmental concerns, embrace a pacifistic foreign policy and believe in an ambitiously redistributionist domestic agenda, they could vote for Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party's presumptive nominee.

Johnson, a successful former two-term Republican governor of Democratic New Mexico, and Stein, a Harvard-educated physician and political activist, are credible, articulate, experienced candidates.

Their combined support approaches 20 percent when they're included in the presidential polls. Neither will win, but winning isn't the point of voting for one of them. Refusing to vote for a lesser evil is the point.

If enough people refuse to vote for the lesser evil, maybe that will nudge the losing party in a better direction for the next one.

Ross Perot's Reform Party accomplished something like that by capturing 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992, enabling Bill Clinton to win the presidency over G.H.W. Bush but also setting the stage for the Republicans to take the House in 1994 for the first time in 40 years.

In any event, for voters dismayed by having to choose between Clinton and Trump, going Green or Libertarian is a more effective option than not voting at all and more ethical than voting against one's conscience.

Bob Foys

Inverness