John J. Pitney Jr.

Polls show that most rank-and-file Republicans are lining up behind Donald Trump. But his dishonesty and bigotry have made him ballot-box poison to a portion of the party’s voters. Where do they turn now?



Voting for Hillary Clinton is a bitter option for embittered Republicans. They disagree with most of her issue positions and are skeptical about her record as secretary of State, especially her email practices. They also have valid concerns about decades of ethics controversies ranging from the Rose Law Firm’s billing records to the Clinton Foundation’s foreign donors.



If the election seems close, anti-Trump Republicans might have no other choice. Yes, Trump has pledged to name conservative justices and make other actions that would please the GOP. Party loyalists, though, have to remember that he has never been loyal to anything but himself. (There is a term for people who have believed his promises. They are called “ex-wives.”) And there is a consideration that goes beyond specific policy issues. Conservative humorist P.J. O’Rourke explains his reluctant support for Clinton this way: “Like a toddler in a home with a loaded handgun, sooner or later Donald will find the briefcase with the nuclear launch codes.”

I like The Establishment and you should, too: Column

Suppose, however, that Clinton goes into the stretch with a big lead. GOP voters who dislike both candidates could simply abstain from voting, at least in the presidential race. But silence is a bad way to voice opinions. When voters skip a contest on the ballot, nobody can tell whether they are disgusted, ambivalent, indifferent, or just lazy.



Another option would be to go with a third candidate. The Libertarian Party has nominated its most credible ticket in history: former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson for president and former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld for vice president. Voting for Johnson and Weld — or maybe another minor-party ticket — would enable Republicans to express both their support for limited government and their disdain for the major-party nominees.



The problem is that no minor-party candidate will win this election. Institutional barriers and entrenched voting patterns make it highly likely that such a candidate will run a distant third. Critics of this approach would ask: Why not cut out the middleman, hold your nose and vote for Clinton?

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

Clinton deserves credit for making history: Jill Lawrence

It’s a fair question, and there is a real answer. If Clinton is going to win anyway, it makes a difference whether she wins by a big majority or a modest plurality. Suppose that Clinton’s vote share is well above 50%. Even if a chunk of her support comes from conservative voters who just want to register opposition to Trump, Democrats will interpret the outcome as a mandate for bigger social programs, stricter gun control and the rest of her agenda. If her winning percentage is well under 50%, by contrast, she will have a tougher time claiming a mandate, and her administration will face serious political constraints. Republicans would prefer a constrained Clinton to an empowered one.



We don’t have to imagine such a scenario: It happened in 1992 with a candidate named Clinton. As Election Day approached and it became clear that Bill Clinton was going to defeat President George H.W. Bush, many voters shifted to independent candidate H.Ross Perot. Although he did not win any electoral votes, Perot got 19% of the popular tally, holding Clinton to just 43%. The political community got the message that a large share of the electorate wanted action on Perot’s signature issue, the national debt. Although Clinton and the Democratic Congress would have preferred to put other issues at the top of their to-do list, they instead took early action to cut the deficit.



From a conservative perspective, it was far from a perfect result: Among other things, the deficit-reduction package included tax increases. But national policy would have gone in a more liberal direction if Bill Clinton had won a bigger vote share. Similarly, a substantial vote for a conservative or libertarian candidate won’t turn Hillary Clinton into a kindred spirit, but it will nudge her administration closer to the center, which is something.



Supporters of the Trump candidacy will denounce any third-party movement, calling it a spoiler. Opponents will look at Trump’s sordid record and ask: How can you spoil something that’s already rotten?



John J. Pitney Jr. is the Roy P. Crocker Professor of American Politics at Claremont McKenna College. Follow him on Twitter @jpitney.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns, go to the Opinion front page, follow us on Twitter @USATOpinion and sign up for our daily Opinion newsletter.