Voting For The Lesser Of Two Evils

Today was the Presidential Preference Primary voting day in Arizona. When choosing a candidate to vote for, many people see the choice as a strategic move, meant to “beat” an opponent and yield a defeat to the “other guy” that they consider extremely undesirable. To that end, they scan the choices on “their side” and determine which of the candidates they believe has the best chance at beating their opponent. When focusing on who best can win the election for their side, attention turns to the “electability” of each candidate. Often times, there is a conflict between who the voter feels best represents their views and who they think can win the election. Many people decide to go against their better judgement and instead pick the person who seems to have the best chance at winning. The logic goes that it is more important to defeat the worst candidate than it is to vote for your favorite person because anything is better than the worst guy taking office.

Voting in this manner is often referred to as “voting for the lesser of two evils.” People don’t want to vote for evil, but they feel it’s better to have a little bit of evil than a lot. However, is this the best way to choose a candidate? Are we “wasting” our vote by choosing someone who probably won’t win?

Here’s a short, but excellent persuasive speech that discusses why voting for the lesser of two evils is a false dichotomy and why it continually yields the results it does:

Some of my favorite points are:

When citizens are obliged to support one candidate who doesn’t represent them, in order to stop another candidate who doesn’t represent them: they end up with a government that…does not represent them.

And:

In truth, the choice to vote for the lesser of two evils is primarily made out of fear. Fear of the devil with his mask off chases us into the arms of the devil with his mask on.

And lastly:

When our justification for supporting one evil is fear of a greater evil, then there is no depth of depravity and atrocity we would not support, as long as there is a darker alterative.

For decades we have been voting for the lesser of two evils. How has that been working out?