bobinator said:
I'm not saying it's the best reason to vote, for sure, just that it can be a valid reason.
If something about one candidate is so bad that you don't want them to hold office, then voting in such a way that could prevent that from happening (as opposed to voting for something that will absolutely not prevent that from happening) is a valid reason to vote.
Obviously we'd all love to be able to always vote for people we want to vote for, but that's not always how the game works.
"
If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for, but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong." - Robert Heinlein.
I will say that, in the Presidential elections since I turned 18, I've voted against far more than for. I've only actually voted for a Presidential candidate twice, and one of those was when I was 18 and didn't know any better. (Still would have voted the same, but I would have been voting against Bill Clinton instead of for Bush41.)
More than once I've voted against a candidate because I got sick of their ads and/or mailers.