No, pretty much the opposite really.

It's not "proving a point" it's actually exercising true democracy. If a political party wants their candidate to get elected then they should run someone who speaks to the people.

I agree with what you say about get out and get someone to run, but in our system money trumps the people's will. We see that over and over again. Look at the legislation that gets put up for votes, look at the secret trade deals that go on behind the scenes (TPP). That wouldn't happen if the people were allowed to have a good candidate and they won't be allowed that until money is out of politics. But how does that happen when the people that need to vote it out are beholden to big money?

There's a survey that Thom Hartmann has been referencing lately and I wish I knew who conducted it since I haven't found it by searching... it shows that Americans are actually progressive based on what they say they want when it doesn't have a party label attached to it. Too bad we can't get candidates who will actually implement these things. Instead they continually chip away at them.

At some point it makes no sense to continue to vote for the lesser of two evils. Not sure I will do that this time around. I certainly will not state that I will vote for whoever the Dem candidate is because then where is the incentive for the Dem Party to put up someone who actually will fight for the people. It would be nonexistent since they know we will just take what we are given.