The Lesser of Two Evils
Published by Matthew Anderson• February 27th, 2008
RSS News Feed
Sometimes I wonder how many others feel the same way I do when sitting down to vote. Do they sigh with dismay when looking at the available candidates? Are they devoid of any enthusiasm? In all honesty, it has been a long time since I or anyone I know has been truly enthused by a candidate running for the House, Senate, Presidency, or any other office of note. Most candidates have provoked reactions ranging from disinterest to disgust, at least in those few instances that I can present as anecdotal evidence. How many other people think like this?
Consider for a moment Congressional approval numbers that made headlines in the last year (18% as of August 2007). Somehow our elected officials in Washington managed to turn in an approval rating lower than that of President Bush and now we find three of them running for President (McCain, Clinton, and Obama). Those three happen to be the only viable candidates left in this year’s primary race unless Huckabee manages to steal the show from McCain. So, this November, we will likely be choosing between two Presidential wannabes that had their fair share of an 18% approval rating as of last August. What a lovely predicament.
It seems that, election after election, we are faced with similarly bleak prospects. In ’04 we were stuck with a pair of former Skull & Bones members who lead many to question whether or not a Presidential election could get any worse. Perhaps things aren’t quite so awful this time around, though a McCain vs. Clinton (or, heaven forbid, Huckabee vs. Clinton) showdown is hardly any better. Perhaps we would be better off if we had some way to officially register our discontent with the current field of candidates without resorting to voting for the “lesser or two evils”. Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to cast a vote against a candidate, thereby committing one or more electors to the nullification of another committed to the hated candidate, taking said candidate further away from the number of electors required to claim victory? Of course, I doubt such a method of voting could ever pass Constitutional muster seeing as how there is no current provision for “voting against” a candidate either in Congressional or Presidential elections; in all likelihood, such a system would be seen as voter disenfranchisement. A “none of the above” option might be possible, but what would such a vote mean? If a majority (or significant minority) of voters opted for “none of the above”, would that somehow invalidate the candidacy of our second-rate candidates? Or would it serve as little more than a stinging thorn in their inflated egos? Who in their right mind would cast a vote for nothing if that vote truly signified nothing?
Despite the consistently disappointing Republican and Democratic Presidential candidates that are trotted out in front of the American people every four years, we have yet to find a way to improve matters. I have already ranted against the primary system recently, lamenting the inability (and/or unwillingness) of established political parties to control their own primaries or carefully choose their candidates. Influence and electability reign supreme in American politics, never mind that our warped system presents us with candidates that many of us seem to hate. Is this human nature? Are we bound to loathe anyone power-hungry and arrogant enough to seek higher office? Or do we somehow err time and again in such a way that we inevitably attract the wrong people to the job? And how is it that those who promise to upend political stagnation in Washington wind up being even worse than the establishment candidates they oppose? Ross Perot? Ralph Nader? Ron Paul? Dark horse candidates they were not.
The two major parties that rule American politics are not serious about fielding candidates based on merit (or, if they are, neither party would know merit if it bit their respective chairmen on their noses). Furthermore, the American public has neither the ability nor the will to reject undesirable candidates when we are presented with them. Perhaps someday we will find a way to express our collective discontent with all candidates available in some way that does not involve voting for the “lesser of two evils” or for a sorry excuse for a third party candidate. Sometimes, it’s fun to dream.
tags:Apathy, Candidates, Elections, News, Policy, Politics, Voters, Voting
Matthew Anderson is a non-violent postal worker, freelance columnist, father, husband, and oddball.
Email this author | All posts by Matthew Anderson
Why choose LESSER evil? Cthulhu for president!
http://thedefeatists.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/22/cthulhu_president.jpg
It’s entirely a reflection of society, though. You can blame the parties and their representatives all you like, but if Americans didn’t want a popularity contest it wouldn’t be one. If we wanted intellectuals and hard workers, Hillary Clinton would fit the bill. If we wanted experience, not a single candidate now or probably ever has had any meaningful experience that could be characterized as “preparing for the White House”.
So it leaves you with the policy issues, your vanity candidate, and the status quo will ride again.
Personally, I think Obama is a great candidate for positive reasons, not negative ones. Clearly many others do as well. To criticize him on the basis of the performance of a group that has been failing to deliver for many years before he joined, that he clearly wants to change for the better, simply lacks any kind of logic.
You may disagree that Obama is a worthy candidate, but if that is the extent of your reasoning it’s pathetic. It is the apathy and negativity of your logic that is as much to blame as any politician or lobbyist.
Agreed, this is a year where you can’t afford to cast aside the issues. Too much is on the line, I think all candidates bring something positive with their campaigns, even John McCain whom I fundamentally disagree with on the war issue.
I’ve voted against the other guy since Jimmy Carter. He was the last guy I voted FOR.
Till Obama. I’ve read his books, watched his speeches and looked over his record.
I’m voting FOR someone again for President again.