All choices should include "none of the above"

I believe the US does this in elections. At least where I live though, election ballots present a certain number of choices, with no way to express that "none of these people are suitable to run the country." That has to change -- it is no more fair than to ask a child "Would you like to sweep chimneys for the rest of your life, or work in the sewers?" The options are fine, but there must be a further option: "I'll keep looking, thanks."

It's not so obvious on this site, but it works in a good way, by default: rather than questions with a limited list of answers, the system itself is the question, or default. Each priority is a possible answer. However, if people don't like the answer/priority, it simply doesn't happen, and life goes on as normal. In effect, opposing a priority is choosing "none of the above" for that issue.

'None of the above' is abdicating responsibility. You're never going to find a candidate or an option that 100% accurately reflects your own opinion, the best you can hope for is the one of the options that you agree with more than the other option. And if you can't face that then you can abstain.

I would post an opposing comment with the alternative detailed within it, is that not sufficient.