I would even go so far as to say that not voting at al is the moral choice. As the article points out, voting has degenerated to a sop that provides the illusion of free choice, but serves only to prop up an immoral system. If a candidate running is someone that you want to see in in office, but the system ensures that the candidate cannot win or even have any influence on the political process, why vote? In some parlimentary systems, candidates who get a certain amount of votes are guaranteed a minority position - in such a system, voting makes sense. That is not so for the current system in the US.

For my birthday, my wife just bought me a 2016 campaign tee shirt for Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

That describes my views on this all very well...

While I may not agree with the politics of the writer, perhaps there is some truth in wasting votes. Slavish adherence to the libertarian party aside, perhaps we ought to do better at voting our conscience by selecting the individual who bet represents our point of view. Even if our vote is for a random name from the phone book. Doesn't this best align with objectivism best by "opting out" of the political discourse that is limited to two parties who are more alike than they publicly care to admit?