Dear Senator Sasse,

I appreciate your thoughtful essay and agree with the principles you put forward. Voting for the lesser of two evils ought not be our best choice. But the structure of our current voting system makes it the deciding factor in many races. This naturally raises two questions:

1. Would you support a Constitutional amendment to adopt a single transferrable vote? This would allow more people to cast a vote for a candidate they actively support while ensuring their vote does not contribute to the election of the person they consider the greater of two evils.
2. Is there a bright line beyond which voting strategically against a candidate is justified? Is any policy position or personal misconduct significant enough that it warrants voting for the lesser of two evils? Removing myself from the details of the present election, I would consider it morally obligatory to vote for a habitual liar if he or she were running against someone who would use the power of office to end our Republic, for example.

Thank you,