Lesser of two evil voting (LOTE) has been part of the USA since its inception, especially preceding the US Civil War. The 1840s and 1850s were periods of intense US cultural dissatisfaction and division. The “LOTE” language wasn’t necessarily used at the time, but Northerners voted to contain slavery while Southerners voted to uphold slavery— both seeing themselves voting against the greater threat. In the election of 1860, Lincoln was actually seen as a lesser of evils with voters on both sides of the political aisle seeing him as too moderate. Lincoln won less than 40% of the popular vote despite his now modern celebrated status.
The LOTE principle dates back at least as far as Aristotle, who wrote in Nicomachean Ethics: “For the lesser evil can be seen in comparison with the greater evil as a good, since this lesser evil is preferable to the greater one, and whatever preferable is good.”
LOTE voting has been around since the founding fathers, but, according to Jon Grinspan, curator of political history at the National Museum of American History, it really became notable about 60 years into our Republic. “The 1830s and 1840s are the period when we get a really strong two-party system, which supercharges the lesser of two evils thinking,” Grinspan says. “After the 1830s, the concept of two parties at war with each other puts a rigid scañolding around ‘lesser of two evils’ logic for an individual candidate.”
A majority of African Americans voted Republican in the late 19th century as the lesser evil compared do the Democratic Party’s Jim Crow South. It appears that people most at risk of losing their rates are motivated out of fear rather than enthusiasm. Historically, voter turnout has been lower in good economic times. Both these suggest that people are motivated to LOTE vote out of fear.
“Historically, a majority of African Americans voted the Republican ticket in the late 19th century, even after the Republican abandonment of Reconstruction, as the ‘lesser of two evils’ compared to the Democratic Party, which was then the party of the Jim Crow South,” says Dr. Manisha Sinha.
“In good economic times, like the 1920s and the 1990s, partisanship is way weaker, as is turnout, and so it’s easier to feel safe taking a risk on someone outside of the twoparty system,” says Grinspan.
That’s not to say third-party voting or abstention is only for the privileged; there are other times when neither party is oñering enough on a key issue for the vote to even be worth it. But historically, we’ve seen LOTE voting in times of fear, not satisfaction.
Chervinsky believes LOTE voting is a product of weak parties. Weak parties produce cannot control their members, and as a result, moderates become attack as “squishy” or “weak.” Weak parties have to point to another party.
The 1968 election is often considered the most to teach us about 2024. In 1968, incumbent Lyndon B. Johnson (D) opted out of the race. The general was between Johnson’s VP, Humbert Humphrey, and Richard Nixon, pitching himself as an anti-establishment candidate. Johnson, and therefore Humphrey, was associated with the Vietnam War which has hugely unpopular with young voters. Additionally, George Wallace ran as a third-party candidate, advocating for segregationist policies and siphoning off votes.
Perhaps the third-party-dominated election with the most to teach us about 2024 is 1968. It’s been cited many times in recent weeks as evidence that it’s not too late for Biden to step down: In 1968, incumbent Lyndon B Johnson opted out of the race at the end of March. The general election became a race between Johnson’s vice president, Hubert Humphrey, and Richard Nixon, who pitched himself as the anti-establishment candidate.
Regarding the long string of nose-holding elections, perhaps the most comparable time was the 1850’s and 60’s, just before the Civil War.
Almost every historian I spoke to noted that we’ve had a historically long string of nose-holding elections; the most comparable time in American history was the 1850s and ’60s, right before the Civil War. I intend to vote for Biden again, but I understand why people abstain or vote third-party. After all, the lesser of two evils is still evil.