Not really. I've seen what we get when stubbornly voting for who I thought was right- if they don't stand a chance you might end up with a much worse situation that screws up everything. Sometimes you have to vote for who is better for the country & not who is the right person for you but are not going to be electable.
Sucks when those are both the same person though.
Precisely and Someone_else says, Obama and Romney are too similar for any difference to matter considering that they are both constitution killers who run roughshod over the liberties which americans are supposed to enjoy. I voted for Obama because he was better than McCain and there was no other person. In this case, Gary Johnson is superior to both because of his stances on freedom. The problem is that many people share your attitude thus, 3rd party people do not lose rather they lose by a landslide further discouraging any further dissent. This is problematic because it is not how the system was designed.
There have been cases of the president and VP being chosen by someone other than the people in history. If we run 3 or 4 or more candidates and all parties reach a significant count, then the House chooses the president and the Senate chooses VP. Since the House and Senate are currently warring factions, this would possibly force the two groups to work together. Imagine President Romney and VP Obama?
The fact is, the system was designed in a way where we are given a specific responsibility. When we start to "hedge bets" we deserve the monsters we're given because we are the ones who enabled them by our own insecurities