I'm fed up with all of the leading figures in both major political parties. Part of the problem is our Tweedledee-Tweedledum two-party system.
I'm disappointed in Barry. He campaigned as an agent of change, and thus far, he's been a lite beer version of George W in too many ways. It may very well be that with our present system, a divided government, with the Dems in the White House, and the Republicans controlling Congress, is the best that we can hope for.
If wish that we had IRV (Instant Runoff Voting), which is similar to the Single Transferable Vote that's used to elect the lower house in the Australian parliament, if I remember correctly. Condorcet is pretty good too. The main point is that if we had a rank-order voting method, with the caveat that you specify your top three choices (and no more than that) in declining order, you're not wasting your vote when you place a 'minor'-party candidate at the top of your list. (I published a Game Theory analysis of politicians' behavior in meaningful multiparty systems, in the Mensa Bulletin, in April of 1996.) Anyway, if we had that, I'd give the Libertarians and other lesser-known third-party candidates serious consideration.
Getting back to your question... Is 'The Donald' worse than the other leading Republicans? Dunno. Since he's never held a major political office (to the best of my knowledge), Trump is a 'pig in a poke'.