Isn't the lesser of two evils still evil?

this is called "the punish vote". You know both are trash candidates, but there´s a slight difference between them that makes you vote for the least repugnant.

I did this in the past elections.

But i´m thinking that supporting the "splinter" party is not throwing our votes away, it´s a form of "manifesto" in which the "social power" that we as citizens have, demand more respectful and honorable candidates for a country, that at the end, leads the way through history.

I'll man up and admit that I voted for a candidate I didn't care for (or, more accurately, against another candidate) and I'll be happy to tell you why.

While I fully agree that Demoblicans and Republicrats are, on average, equally useless, there are certain members of both parties who earn special recognition for going far above and beyond the typical level of insanity. Julia Carson is a frequent flyer on this list, and I gladly voted for her Republican opponent since no Libertarian was running.

Crazy is still crazy, but crazy has degrees. When no better alternative exists, I'll vote for less crazy.

this is a debate that usually applies and passionately defended. The choice could be likened to choosing between tweedledum and tweedledee, or more darkly, between Exxon and Texaco. So many thoughtful people used to not vote so as not to encourage the politicians, and not to defile themselves. Today, however, the choice is much more serious for the future of the country. Whatever one thinks of the democrats, the choice to support Bush any further could be a catastrophe beyond imagining and deserves a vote against on deeper principle.

EVeryone talks that our system does not work and the canidates are jerks. Then why not Vote for Ross Pero, and Lee Iakoka. Two of biggest business minds in the country. But does it really matter who is in the White house. You could put Mickey Mouse and still have everything coming out goofy.

What a lot of people don't realise that this is just a saying. The word "evil" isn't meant to be taken literally. It is just a way of referring to when you happen to be faced with a situation that you are going to have to deal with. You've got two options, neither of which is that terrific, but you've got to do something so the advice always is to do what any sensible person would, and choose the one that creates the lesser amount of hassle, or the least possible problem.

Somebody, somewhere, sometime, came up with a pretty neat, succinct way of expressing it with the coined phrase, the lesser of two evils - "evils" simply meaning the two options neither of which was ideal, but the best there was to work with.

I ask Repubs and Demos this...Why would you keep voting for the same thing year after year?

Both supported Iraq War, both support Big government, both spend more than we take in. Both believe in Prohibition. Both have little respect for Constitution. Both lie and both have broken the law for self gain.

Again I ask why?

today when voting if there was no good choice...i didn't cast a vote in that category. No since in giving my vote to someone that I dont belive...I would rather not cast a vote for that particular category. Thinking back there was only one of those today that I didn't vote in.

I've been trying to tell independents that all the time. The only wasted vote is a vote against what you believe.

I'm Libertarian and guess what, I voted Libertarian.

yes...well here is a link...all this political stuff has got me down... I am going to go over to Thanksgiving cooking recipes and check out pumpkin pie recipe questions!!...

ok, I deleted the link it was too left...then the next I found was too right and so on...sorry

Yes, sometimes a vote is not for somebody, but rather against somebody else.