To me, this election is again about voting for the lessor of 2 evils.
Why do you say that? This is one thing that REALLY bothers me is that no one considers a minor party candidate because they are "unelectable". The minor parties will remain minor parties as long as people are not voting for their candidates. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. I know that is not necessarily what you meant but it struck a chord with me.
If an election did come down to only two candidates, each one not really "good" in the eyes of the beholder, then it would seem to come to the voting for the lesser evil if only because the option of not voting leaves one's fate to the whims of others. When I look for a candidate to support I place their stances on self defense in a high priority.
There is an excellent essay floating around civil liberty sites like this one that explains the importance of a candidate's stance on the Second Amendment. I forget where I saw it but I took it to heart.
Because the right to self defense, and the effort to curb that right, is such a hot button issue it is difficult to get a candidate to state outright and truthfully where they stand on those issues. If we can get any of them to so much as speak on self defense, or even acknowledge it as an issue, I consider that a victory. It is a minor victory but an important one.
The first job of a politician is to get elected. The second job of a politician is to get re-elected. They will always be compared to the previous holder of that office. They will always be compared to the words and deeds of another candidate. We need to press the issue at every election so that the candidates will be forced to explain their interpretation of the Constitution, as amended, and shift that Overton Window to where our right to self defense is in proper view.
