Voting for what is alleged as the lesser of two evils is not some ultimate form of patriotism, that's propaganda, it should be taken at face value as a vote for a particular evil. Were someone to want to show true pride for their country, they would be seeking to have both major candidates barred from ever serving in public office, and that's simply to start. There's a fair amount of legal justification to bring both of them before the courts.
It would do good to note the difference of patriotism from pride. It is difficult to give a fair critique of a system of government when one is patriotic, it involves a certain attachment to a person's homeland and that feeling is likely to involve an attachment to that nation's system of government. Feeling pride does not have to directly correlate with the notion of a homeland, rather it can be felt about the community of citizens that make up the country without the burden of being beholden to the idea of the nation itself.
It is also important to note that the reason such distinction is not only necessary but should be strictly defined (and on one side avoided) is that the patriot seeks to further the agenda of the nation and it's ruling system, while the person with pride for their community seeks to create a better community. The founding fathers, although they enjoy a luxurious white-wash in the American education were rather unscrupulous, if not incredibly intelligent people. They owned slaves, they sought to keep the masses out of government, they created a system of class that would protect the wealthy from the poor and instituted systems that would widen the gap of inequality and this is evidenced by their own admission in various letters, journals by their own hand.
This is inherently the system that a patriot seeks to uphold, consciously or otherwise, whereas someone who takes pride in themselves as well as their people seeks to further distance the population from antiquated theories of oppression. The patriot is the person who will vote for either candidate in this election, but the citizen with pride, seeing this as merely a device to further centuries of malpractice, will seek out viable new options in order to further humanitarian efforts.
There is a popular axiom in this country that follows along the lines of, "You live in a country where you a re free to vote and should therefore do so." But knowing that voting seeks to sustain the calamities ingrained with the current form of government, the inverse must be considered that since we do not live in a country where it is mandatory to vote (therefore forcing the public to tacitly endorse governmental tyranny) then one should exercise the right to not vote.
Abstention may be the most powerful tool of nonviolent protest available to the public this election cycle. Remember, voting for either evil, we can logically conclude, will lead to evil. It is a refusal to show any support for the government at all that will deal the blow that will open the government up to major reconstruction by and for the people.