In a fair turn at the middle ground, I'll agree with you that Trump vs Hillary was a terrible set of choices, and in a better universe neither would have been the two options to choose between. I think the evidence and the "smoke" swirling around the Clintons suggest they may be the two most (successfully) corrupt and conniving politicians in our lifetime either in the US or Europe. Trump is many bad things, but he is also an open book, and I think that's a large part of what got him elected (on top of his ability to entertain a crowd).
All I'm saying about the investigation and all the coverage and collateral damage is that it was based on the flimsiest of pretexts and the majority of media outlets were "breathlessly" repeating "the walls are closing in" and "another bombshell" about what turned out to be a big nothing burger. Some individual commenters and pundits have noted that all of that has given Trump ammo for 2020, but that level of self-awareness is poorly distributed. For example, if Rachel Maddow had even one honest/self-aware ounce in her body she should either resign or grovel for like a week straight to her listeners. But no, I'm already seeing the denial stage of grief in everyone from random Twitter users to Rep Schiff.
In a turn back to the middle ground, in retrospect Obama was a better option than McCain (may he rot in hell), and a tossup with Romney. With all his warts, and what we know now about how Trump has behaved as President, I'd still take him over HRC though. The DNC does have Yang as an option this year if they want to beat Trump, but the media coverage seems to be set to push Harris. I expect that to be a losing effort.
