In defense of third party voting

I’d like to start by making it very clear that I think one *could* theoretically morally vote for any candidate this election. I am not here to be yet another person telling you why the candidate I’ve chosen is the only one you can possibly vote for. Voting is certainly a moral act; it is also a prudential act, aka a matter where there is no obvious answer and we have to use our own prudence to decide what our best choice is. I’m not here to talk about candidates as much as I am to talk about our thought processes.

In couples counseling, we often spend a lot of time working on process versus content. The content of an argument is what it’s about, aka the dishes, or the dog, or the finances, or being on time. Content is not unimportant, but we often get stuck here, unable to take a step back to see anything bigger than that exact moment, aka “but my way of loading the dishwasher really is best”. Process is often where the actual meat and potatoes of relational function or dysfunction is found. Process is how we approach the content, including everything from tone of voice to our subconscious metaphysical beliefs about our spouse’s ability to enact change. Process is how we approach, reason, relate, emote, and conclude when it comes to conflict and big questions. And being able to zoom out from in-the-moment content to understand our process is where true health can blossom in a relationship.

The process versus content exploration extends far beyond relational conflict. It can be applied to our internal emotional processes, to our philosophical frameworks, and to our voting. I am far less concerned with who you vote for (content) than I am with how you have chosen who you’ll vote for (process). Because if I’m honest, I see and hear a hell of a lot of bad bad process out there on this topic. I see a lot of decidedly un-Catholic process out there from a lot of Catholics. Now I don’t really truly blame anyone. The political landscape is a hellscape right now and aggressive partisanship will be the death of us all etc etc etc.

We are all philosophical creatures, and we all operate from our philosophical beliefs whether we know it or not (another future substack?). But not all philosophies are made equal, and there are some philosophies that don’t align with a Catholic sense of the world to the extent that the Church asks us not to use them. For example: Catholicism relies on a philosophy that things have an inherent, objective quality to them, that we subjectively comprehend. In moral situations, we should do our best to make our choices based off of that inherent quality and not anything else. Catholics are asked NOT to use utilitarianism/consequentialism, aka making our choices based on outcome. If something is bad, we shouldn’t do it, even if it produces the outcome we want. Likewise, if something is good, we should do it, even if it won’t produce the outcome we want. Catholics are also asked not to use proportionalism, aka assessing moral choices as compared to each other, as opposed to their inherent quality. So we’re not allowed to choose a lesser of two evils, because a lesser evil is still evil.

I’m sure by now you can see where I’m headed.

I’m pretty firmly and openly team third party, which is often an unpopular stance. I have yet to find a major-party candidate I feel comfortable putting my vote behind, and perhaps more importantly I have yet to find a compelling argument against voting third party. All the arguments I know of rely on utilitarianism/consequentialism.

“It won’t work!” I know my third party candidate won’t win AND that’s not a criterion I factor into my decision.

“A vote for a third party is just a vote for (insert other side’s candidate)!” No. It’s literally not. I do not add a vote to “the other side” by voting third party. I add a vote for a third party candidate. That’s on record.

Now for my more nebulous but arguably more important argument. It feels pretty obvious to say we should vote for good and not vote for evil. This is not explicitly Church teaching, but I’d extend this concept to say we should vote for philosophical positives not for philosophical negatives. (Philosophical positives are what is, are existence; philosophical negatives are what isn’t, are absences.) The concept of good is tied to existence and being, and the concept of evil is a privation, an absence, a lack. The more we heed what is rather than what isn’t, the healthier we will be. I’m certainly not advocating a head in the sand approach (we must always be honest about evil), but rather where do we draw our sense of reality, and what do we look towards for guidance.

When it comes to voting, I think it’s fair to say we’re better off voting for something we agree with than against something we don’t. If you like Trump’s economic policy, vote for him. If you like Harris’ social policy, vote for her. If you like Cornel West’s explicitly spiritual policies, vote for him. Obviously no candidate is perfect. But if your whole plan is to vote for a major party candidate simply to keep the other out?

I’m not immune to this. I’ve been sorely tempted, these past weeks, to vote for Harris simply to keep Trump out (and also to vote for the first woman President; something I’m severely disappointed I wasn’t able to do). But I didn’t actually want Harris to be President. I didn’t want to vote for her. I just want Trump to be President even less. I’d only be voting for her as a lesser evil, which is… still voting for an evil.

Democracy is a wonderful thing. Modern women’s rights are incredible. I have a vote. I am responsible for my vote, and should use it. But I am only responsible for my vote. Not anyone else’s vote. Not the outcome of the election. Not anyone else’s evil. I cannot control those things. I am not required to try to predict or work around these things. Those millions of moving pieces will do as they do, and whatever the outcome, God will be God. The only Person before whom I vote.

I am responsible for using my vote in the way my conscience and prudence dictate, without the use of consequentialism or proportionalism. And I think if we thought of it this way, used this process, and ignored the weeds of other less healthy processes? A lot more of us would be voting third party.