A Response to the ‘No Lesser of Two Evils’ Crowd
You’ve heard anti-Republican critics say, “I just can’t vote for the lesser of two evils.” If this is true, then you can never vote since we’re all evil, although some are more evil than others. I have a number of Calvinist friends who use the “lesser of two evils” argument. If you know anything about Calvinism, then you know the acronym TULIP. The “T” in Tulip stands for Total Depravity. It also goes by the names total inability or total corruption. It’s not that a person is pure depravity but that all his actions and thoughts are tainted by evil. Sin has corrupted every part of our being.
This means that any choice of a political candidate is a lesser of two totally depraved people. The people that say they will not vote for the lesser of two evils will get one of the two evils whether they vote or not. In this election, they may get the greater of two evils. And it’s not just the greater evil of one man we may get, but we may get the greater of two evils when it comes to judges, new laws, executive orders, wealth confiscation, and a whole lot more. The past four years should be a wake-up call to the no lesser than two evils crowd.
Then there’s the claim that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties. Nonsense. Let’s say that since 1980 all conservatives had followed the “I won’t vote for the lesser of two evils candidate.” Where do you think we would be today?
The argument I often hear is that when things get really bad, the American people will finally realize that they made the wrong political choices and will finally embrace a new way of doing politics. It’s possible. But things could go terribly wrong as it has in so many countries around the world. With nearly 50 percent of the American people not paying federal taxes and actually getting money from the government and 50 million people on food stamps, what side of the political spectrum do you think they will get behind? It won’t be the conservatives (or libertarians).
Trending: ‘Socialism for Thee but not for Me’
What’s so irritating about those pushing a third party is that they never really do it. The presidency is the last political office they should be pursuing. If the no lesser than two evils crowd were really serious, they would be putting up local candidates in elections all across the country. They should have been doing it for 30 years. If you can’t win locally, you’re not going to win nationally. If there is no broad-based national grassroots support and a demonstration of success politically, what do the critics of the “Republicrats” expect to accomplish at the top of the ticket?
There’s talk of Ron Paul running as a third-party candidate. What’s it going to prove? Let’s say he gets 10 million votes. He won’t get a single electoral vote. And even if elections were won by majority vote totals and not by electoral votes, he still wouldn’t win anything.
The lesser of two evils franchise will say that they will be “sending a message.” Yeah, that they’re idiots.
The Tea Party has done more in two years than the “no lesser than two evil” people have done in 30. They’ve put their talk into action inside the Republican Party. They sent a real message. Talk to Richard Lugar about it and also the Lt. Governor of Texas who get beat by Ted Cruz.
It’s easy being a critic. It’s hard building a party. The Democrats and Republicans built their parties. The establishment leadership in both parties has worked hard to keep competitors out. If getting pushed around is all it takes for the competition to leave, the establishment is going to keep doing it and laughing when they throw spit balls from the sidelines.