Lesser evil redux

I've discussed the lesser-evil principle on several occasions. As I recall, that was in relation to the 2016 presidential election. As we gear up for the 2020 presidential election, I'd like to revisit that issue:

1. It wouldn't surprise me if this time around Trump has more enthusiastic support from many evangelicals. Those who agonized about voting for him last time won't agonize this time. For them he's no longer the lesser evil; rather, his administration has generally been quite good in its own right, and not simply better than whatever the Democrats offer up.

2. That said, the way the issue is cast is misleading. In my experience, NeverTrumpers think the lesser-evil principle is one-sided. They think the other side (Trump voters) practices the lesser-evil principle while their own side (NeverTrumper) refuses to sink to that level. But that's an illusion. Both sides operate with the lesser-evil principle. 

In 2016, Trump voters thought not voting for Trump was worse than voting for Trump. Conversely, NeverTrumpers thought voting for Trump was worse than not voting for Trump. Notice that both sides use the same principle. The difference is not that NeverTrumpers sidestep the principle; rather, they relocate it. They thought voting for Trump was a greater evil than not voting for Trump, while supporters thought not voting for Trump is a greater evil than voting for Trump. Or, to put it in reverse, NeverTrumpers thought not voting for Trump was a lesser evil than voting for him while supporters thought voting for him was a lesser evil than not voting for him.

Both sides are making comparative assessments based on whether a certain action is better than another action; whether taking a particular action is worse than inaction. So the lesser-evil principle is unavoidable in situations like that. If NeverTrumpers think they can opt out of the the lesser-evil principle, thereby avoiding complicity in that principle, they are deceiving themselves.