"We're not electing a Sunday School teacher."
"Not voting for Trump is a vote for Clinton."
"If you can't vote for the man, vote the platform."
"Lesser of two evils."
I've heard Christians explain their rationale for voting for Clinton.
"At least this unappealing choice is not the unconscionable choice of Trump and more of a known quantity."
"Checking unprecedented evil with predictable evil."
My question (asked three different ways) is this:
Is there a threshold after which a vote for one candidate or the other is morally repugnant? Is there a point where the ends don't justify the means? Is there a point where consequentialism is compromise?
And if there is, have we crossed it with these two candidates? If so, then consequentialism is compromise.