I think that it's necessary to make a distinction between concern and hate. We really don't know these candidates that well to determine whether we hate them personally or not. We might hate some of their ideas or ways of campaigning but hate is pretty strong. I don't think anyone on Mudcat including me would want to physically hurt any of the people who we disagree with and so the use of the word "hate" is misplaced. I think we can dislike many of the policies with which we are presented. I think we can also recognize criminality and corruption when we see it.
I favor a nuanced approach to politics and this is why I gravitate to articles and books written by such astute authors as Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, Howard Zinn, David Brock, Amy Goodman, and personal accounts by Paul Krugman, Dennis Kucinich, and I have even read both of Hillary's books "It Takes a Village" and her autobio. I've read Bill's book too. Paul Wellstone, John Kenneth Galbraith and others of this level of thought have opened doors to new ideas for me. I haven't read "Audacity of Hope" yet but it's on my list.
There are so many books out there that I wish I had time for. The only hope we have of making informed decisions is to be exposed to many ideas and select the ones that make sense for us. My view of most of the Mudcatters here are they are decent people who really don't have "hate" going for them. Many, like me, are passionate about what they think and sometimes the heated differences get personal. These spats are really weapons of mass distraction. I hope as voters we can all focus on the issues and let the personalities slide.