[giantg2]

Some of that is dictated at a system level. Because states have different primary dates, many states are left with limited, if any, choice for who to put on the general ballot because so many drop out. The voter turn out for primaries is abysmal, so it could be considered "significant" depending on how you want to look at it, but the percentage number could be as low as single digits out of the overall population.

Then you have the game mentality that you have to pick the candidate with the most chance of winning that still shares some of your views, or that the polling shows your higher pick will lose. Ranked choice could really help here.

By the time you get to the general election it's basically a choice between a shit sandwich and a shit sandwich without the bread.

[mousepilot]

I don't disagree. I will add that the "system level" is itself legislated by elected officials. Its an interesting thing, like a series of games where the winner gets to redefine rules for the next match in the series. At some point the game can become rigged.