This November, Americans will be voting for the 45th United States president. The candidates for the two major parties, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, have the two lowest favorability ratings of presidential nominees in modern American history. In a country dominated by two major parties, those of us who dislike both candidates feel forced to chose the lesser of two evils.

I live in a blue state, so this decision seems easy for most people I talk to. Of course we can't let Trump win. Even Bernie Sanders is encouraging his supporters to back Hillary Clinton, arguing that "now is not the time for a protest vote." It's time for Bernie supporters to swallow their pride and vote for the democrat. #BernieOrBust supporters or third party voters are criticized for being irrational, and even privileged, for having the luxury to throw away a vote when Trump could very well become our next president. In my opinion, however, issues such as wealth inequality, environmental destruction, and racial justice are too important and pressing for gradual improvement.

Although the DNC heavily favors Clinton, I've been a Sanders supporter since I learned about his truly progressive platform, which is largely funded by the people instead of big donors and harmful industries. Listening to Sanders speak awakened me to the extreme inequality our country faces -- inequalities that will likely persist as our country goes on to elect another establishment politician. To me, Clinton represents much of what is wrong with the current Democratic Party. Although I agree with democratic policy positions more than I agree their republican counterparts, I am put off by the hypocrisy exhibited by candidates who accept money from the same corporations and industries they exhibit disapproval for. Clinton, for example, receives so much funding from the 1 percent that I find it hard to believe that she is truly interested in redistributing their wealth.

Many argue that splitting the liberal vote by encouraging third party votes is as bad as voting for Trump. Although I hate the guilt that most of society is now attributing to a third party vote, I agree with this notion to a certain extent. On one hand, I want to challenge the corruption/bias of the DNC and our strict two-party "democracy." On the other hand, I can't even imagine how a Trump presidency could set us back as a country. The only simple solution to avoid handing the election to Trump is to vote for Clinton, and I do think it would be easier for progressive things to happen under a Clinton presidency. However, this is not a simple solution to me personally because I still don't support Clinton or her neoliberal ideals.

Before I get into why I'm choosing to support a third party candidate, I definitely acknowledge that my decision might be different if I lived in a different state. According to the FiveThirtyEight Election Forecast, Hillary Clinton has a 99.9 percent chance of winning in my home state, California, so for me, voting isn't so much about influencing the outcome. If you live in a deep blue or deep red state, that's not going to change, even with a relatively significant amount of third party support. Therefore, I don't have to worry about "letting" Trump win by choosing not to vote for Clinton. However, if I were to live in a swing state, I might feel more pressure to vote for Clinton, since the electoral vote for those states likely will come down to the last few hundred votes, and I definitely don't want Trump to win. Yes, I realize living in California does gives me a huge privilege by allowing me to vote third party without directly giving Trump an upper hand in electoral votes. I am very aware of this privilege, and my decision this election is a very morally conflicting one.

This election, I'm choosing to vote for Jill Stein, the Green Party nominee, because there are reasons to vote for a third party candidate, even if she may not win the state, let alone the election. The first reason is because candidates must have a certain of percentage of votes in order to participate in national debates. Although it's too late for Stein or Johnson (a Libertarian candidate) to be able to participate in debates this election, increasing support for third parties will certainly help increase their chances of representation in future debates. It's crucial for third party candidates to participate in these debates because the exposure helps American voters see third party candidates as viable options that may be more in line with their beliefs than the two major party candidates. Another benefit to voting third party is that it can increase the party's federal funding, resulting in huge benefits for the party in future elections.

Ideally, the majority of voters, who don't like Trump or Hillary, would realize that they don't have to support either of them. Yet still the overwhelming majority of people attack third party supporters for wasting their vote in such a polarized election. Although it's too late for this to happen this election, raising awareness about third party options can prevent us from having to face a similarly impossible decision in four years.

Although some very important issues (i.e. saying no to TPP, banning fracking, etc.) are still not represented, it is largely thanks to Sanders that the Democratic platform is the most progressive it's ever been, yet I still can't bring myself to trust that Clinton is going to take this platform and really push for the revolution this country needs. If you do decide that it is time for you to fall in line and support Clinton to keep Trump out of office, that's great. Just make sure not to stop there, and continue pushing for real progress by supporting local progressives in state elections, as well as in congress.

Personally, as a California voter, choosing not to vote for Hillary won't make a difference in the outcome of the election. Therefore, I really would like to use my vote to support Jill Stein, even though I know she's not going to win California, because her platform and party are what I want to see more of. As a country, our current health care system, education system, economy, and environment can't afford to make tiny changes over a long period of time. By setting our goals low, we lower our standards for what our country can accomplish. Like Bernie, Jill and the Green Party want to take power away from big corporations and give it back to the people.

Some argue that many ideals of the Green Party and other far left candidates are too idealistic and therefore unattainable. However, I believe that, given the state our country and planet is in now, we can't afford not to take real significant action against the industries that are destroying our economy and our environment. We have the power and money to minimize suffering and promote empathy and compassion through our government policies. All we have to do is redistribute those resources.

Make sure to register and participate in all elections, not just the federal ones. Our political system may be a mess now, but we do have the power to change it.