Do You Vote for the Lesser Evil?
By Damon Eris | 08/01/2012 | Elections 2012, Headline, President | 32 Comments
Credit: Think Progress
It is commonplace in our politics today to view the decision between a Democrat and a Republican is nothing more than a forced choice between competing evils. It can be difficult, however, to find data that might provide us with greater insight into the prevalence of the lesser of two evils mentality among the American voting public.
Fortunately, two new polls may shed a little bit of light on the matter. A Rasmussen public opinion survey published yesterday asked flat out: “When looking at a choice between Obama and Romney, is it a choice you are excited about or will you simply be voting for the lesser of two evils?”
In the poll of 1,000 likely voters, 46% stated they would be voting for the lesser of two evils, compared with only 45% who said they are excited about the choice between the Republican and Democratic party candidates for president.
As moral philosophers have argued down through the centuries, it is rationally impossible to make a conscious choice in favor of evil. On such a view, a vote for the lesser evil between a Democrat and a Republican is not a choice in favor of that candidate but rather a vote against the other candidate, who is perceived as the greater evil. In this sense, the lesser evil mentality can be seen as a form of reaction.
A Quinnipiac University survey released just today can provide us with a bit more insight into this matter. The swing state poll of likely voters in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania found that Obama is preferred by at least 50% of respondents in all three of these strategically important states. Interestingly, after gauging its respondents support for the Democratic and Republican party candidates, the survey inquired whether they strongly favor the candidate, if they like him but with reservation, or if they support him only because they dislike the other candidate. The results were quite different from what one might be led to expect from the Rasmussen survey.
In Ohio, where Obama was favored 50% to 44% over Romney, 60% of Obama supporters said they strongly favor the incumbent, while 31% said they like him with reservations and 9% stated that they plan to vote for Obama simply because they dislike Romney. The situation was fairly different among Romney supporters: 42% said they strongly favor the former Massachusetts governor, 35% said they like him with reservations and 22% stated that they support him only because they dislike Obama.
A similar breakdown was found in Florida and Pennsylvania. Floridians preferred Obama over Romney 51% to 45%. Among Obama supporters there, 65% said they strongly favor the president, 24% said they like him with reservations, while 10% stated they support him because they dislike Romney. Among Romney supporters, 49% said they strongly favor the Republican candidate, 29% said they like him with reservations and 19% said they support him because they dislike Obama.
In Pennsylvania, likely voters leaned toward Obama over Romney 53% to 42%. Among Obama supporters, 59% said they strongly favor the Democratic candidate, while 33% said they like him with reservations and just 7% said they support him because they dislike Romney. Likely Romney voters were less enthusiastic: 41% said they strongly favor him, 37% said they like him but with reservations and 22% said they support the Republican because they dislike Obama.
Clearly, the lesser evil mentality is firmly ingrained within the American political psyche: 31% of Ohio voters, 29% of Floridians and 29% of Pennsylvanians will not be voting in favor of Obama or Romney, but rather against the one or the other.
Of course, the presidential contest is not the only race in which many Americans will feel they are forced to choose between two evils. Perhaps if voters began casting their ballots for candidates they do in fact support rather than voting for the lesser evil between the Republican and Democrat, we might find the resulting composition of government less objectionable.
As a final note, it should be mentioned that both polls should be seen as deeply flawed as neither provided respondents with an accurate reflection of the choices that will be available to them on the November ballot, which will include Independent and third party options such as Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein of the Green Party.




Leave Your Comment →
32 Comments
Amos Cooper
08.01.2012
@adcooper12
It’s sad that the two party system severely limits our choice for president. This is especially evident this election considering Obama and Romney have been shown to be similar in their political views. There was actually an article posted here a few weeks ago listing 100 ways Obama and Romney are the same.
Shawn M. Griffiths
08.01.2012
@shawntx
This mentality is precisely why the two party system, as it is today, prevails. People surrender to the idea that this is the system and the system cannot be changed, or they are resistant to the idea of change, or they truly believe we have to have the two party system. You’re right, by not acknowledging the other candidates on the general election ballot the survey is flawed, but survey takers have a habit of phrasing questions in a way they can get a desired result. All it takes sometimes is to alter the question just a tiny bit.
Brad R. Schlesinger
08.02.2012
@bradschlesinger
Never. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.
Craig D. Schlesinger
08.02.2012
@craigschlesinger
Ah, I see someone excelled at Game Theory!
Peter Susskind
08.04.2012
I am tired of all of this. Obama is a principled, intelligent, and honest man whom I admire. Romney is none of these. Of course the system is flawed, but electing an independent in the vein of Ross Perot or Ralph Nader, for instance, wouldn’t solve anything, not that there is an electable independent anyway.
TaxMaiden
08.04.2012
@TaxMaiden
The two-party system has corrupted the entire country. If you look at the list of top contributors to Romney and Obama, it is identical. Because they know that no matter who wins, they will be bailed out. I am voting for Gary Johnson because he has more executive experience than the other two. He was a two-term governor of New Mexico, cut taxes and spending, left the state with a billion dollar surplus and created jobs. He is the best candidate running and if everyone in the country had the opportunity to listen to him, the other two parties would lose. The lesser of two evils has got to end. Both of the old party candidates are going to take us over the cliff with more wars, more spending and more debt. If you care about this country in the least we must vote these people out and try someone who has walked the walk.
Michael Snider
08.04.2012
3rd party.
Dave Czohara
08.04.2012
Yes, lesser of 2 evils. That simple.
Laura Sheeley
08.04.2012
3rd Party – lesser of two evils is still evil.
Ricky Gandhi
08.04.2012
this question implies that a 3rd party candidate isn’t evil either..
Paul S.Vines
08.04.2012
I am not certain that there is enough difference in the two for there to be a lesser of two evils
Chuck Howard
08.04.2012
In the primary I always vote for who I want to win. Unfortunately, the establishment always seems to pick our “candidate” for us and that’s how we come up with the lesser of two evils.
Melissa Smilie
08.04.2012
I will write in Ron Paul if need be.
JRey Crow
08.04.2012
I will resort to a write in before I knowingly vote for evil.
Cathy Gitschlag
08.04.2012
3rd party…no longer supporting “lesser of 2 evils” evil is evil
J Paul Read
08.04.2012
We as the voting public are caught in a perpetual Catch-22, having to vote for the lesser of two evils. A strong third party would keep everyone in cheque, but until the Libertarians figure it out, we are doomed.
Salomon Torrescano
08.04.2012
i don’t want to waste my vote so I’ll be voting for the lesser of two evils.
Greg Curry
08.04.2012
Romney and his agenda skeeres the crap ouuta me !
Jay Polatnick
08.04.2012
One’s vote is only ‘wasted’ if you’re in a Swing-State, otherwise it’s a foregone conclusion. Vote your conscience.
Joshua Nagy
08.04.2012
I wish Gary Johnson was more like Ron Paul.
Either write in Ron Paul or don’t vote at all, if I do vote at all I will go third party.
Angie Huitron
08.04.2012
If we vote for a third party FOR SURE the More Evil will win!!! We Independents HAVE TO be very vigilant how the race is going, our vote might give Power the THE EVIL ONE! and OUR Vote will NOT count!
Reta Sanden
08.04.2012
3rd party as I’ve done for years…..and since in my state I will have to write in my vote, so be it.
Edward Theilmann
08.04.2012
Green Party . Screw the democrats and republicans. They screw us year after year it’s time we repaid them
Jon Vogel
08.04.2012
The clown in the white house is bush all over. 3rd party period.
Amy Millis
08.04.2012
I REFUSE to vote for EITHER evil!
My vote will go to RON PAUL! I REFUSE to make an exception when I have the choice this year to VOTE FOR GOOD!
Joshua Lyons
08.04.2012
Voting the lesser of two evils still gets you evil. It also further perpetuates the status quo. “Wasting your vote” is Relinquishing your conscience and helping evil to continue just as like keeping yourself locked in the abused spouse syndrome. (Discussed this on the radio show today).
Finally, the Romney vs. Obama election is approximately 0.0% of the solution. Focus on actual solutions (state-based solutions) and use your time wisely. Asking the Federal gov’t to limit itself and expecting it will do so is about as realistic as asking Darth Vader to stop choking Imperial Officers.
DC will NEVER fix DC…
Mike Dorsey
08.04.2012
Yep, voting for who I feel will do less damage to the country.
Olive Gaines
08.04.2012
Yes.
Jeff Mullen
08.04.2012
I’ve checked, and found that Jill Stein and I agree on 86% of the issues–she’s better than any other candidate, third-party or not. So…I will be voting for her.
I might consider voting for the lesser of two evils, if that lesser candidate could meet my minimum standards–but neither one can. Obama has waged illegal wars and committed murder. Though he’s tried to cover it up in gobbledygook, it’s really that simple. Romney has made it clear that he will be another Republibot, and give us four more years of the FAILED policies of the George W. Bush and his neocon toadies. That is not acceptable either. Therefor, I will not be voting for either of them.
Other people should think about the concept of MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE STANDARD in conjunction with the “lesser of two evils” approach. The latter does not work without the former.
Kathy Litzenberger
08.04.2012
would be nice to have 3rd party but right now there is not enough to elect a president. n I dislike obama so much I will putting my check mark by Rommeys names just to make sure the evil in the whit house gets out n hope next time I will be putting by a 3rd pary choice.
Jana Morphis
08.04.2012
After decades of “lesser of 2 evils” has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be completely ineffective, anything but the 2 main parties is the only moral choice I can see.
Jordanna
08.08.2012
I used to vote that way. Even in the last pres. election. NOT this time and never again. I WILL vote for Gary Johnson. It will not be wasted. If everyone votes for what they truly believe in then whomever wins will deserve it.