I don’t think I’ve ever endorsed a presidential candidate, and I probably never will. Even if one party literally nominates Hitler… the other party will probably pick a Hitler too. That’s how game theory in a winner-take-all system works: there are always two parties targeting precisely 50% of the electorate with nearly identical views. Marketing requires that they exaggerate the differences and focus on personalities, but in an absolute sense, they are virtually indistinguishable.

If a party gains 51% if the vote, the other party will react by shifting their marketing to restore the balance. Realtime polling has made the process so efficient that we should expect the prior probability of a candidate winning the presidency to asymptotically move towards precisely 50%, though the nature of the electoral college means this doesn’t translate to 50% of the vote.

Sure, just about any libertarian candidate is superior to any major party candidate. But that’s precisely because they have no chance of winning. Only a power-hungry, unprincipled pragmatist can become a successful politician in a democracy with universal suffrage.