It seems this problem is perennial. The duties of care in election, and our role as Catholics falls under traditional analysis of the Fourth Commandment. My trusty old catechism, published over 100 years ago raises this very point:
In addition to all this, the citizens ought to assist their ruler in the government of the country, by choosing as their representatives men of experience and Christian principles.
Not only the representatives of the people, but the electors of those representatives, have a weighty responsibility in God’s sight. The former are responsible for the laws they make, the latter for the men they choose to make the laws. In the exercise of his civil rights, it is incumbent on the citizen to obey the will of his Lord and God, for he will one day have to answer for the manner in which he exercised that right. In all human affairs the truths of Christianity must be our guiding light. Let no one therefore assert that religion has nothing to do with politics. Statesmen, public functionaries, senators, members of Congress, Cabinet officers, will all have to give an account of every word they have spoken, every vote they have given. And electors will be responsible for the men they have returned to Congress or the Senate; consequently they should elect men of experience, acquainted with the law, and above all, possessed of Christian principle; for those who are destitute of all religious beliefs cannot be expected to act conscientiously, or adhere to their promises. And since matters closely connected with the essentials of religion are often the subject of debate, it is the duty of Catholics to vote for such candidates as will act justly in dealing with ecclesiastical questions, and have the interests of the Church at heart.
If a Catholic, by giving his vote to a candidate who is hostile to the Church, or by abstaining from voting, makes himself in part responsible for the success of that candidate, he has much to answer for.
Catholic electors ought not to return as their representative one who is only a nominal, not a practical Catholic, who regards with indifference or contempt the teaching and ministers of the Church. Before going to the ballot they should ascertain the views of the candidate upon education, marriage, the observance of Sunday, etc.; better not to vote at all than vote for one who is hostile to religion. It is, however, a duty to vote if thereby one can avert evil and promote what is good. Let no man say: My vote is of no consequence; it might turn the scale, and if not, at any rate it lessens the defeat of the non-successful candidate. Those who are not entitled to vote ought to pray that the result of the election may be favorable to the cause of religion and of the country in general.
Following and being careful of the duties we owe to vote today, I think we need some prayers! There’s a lot to consider! And, the news does not make it easy to truly determine the nature of the issues nor what the candidates believe.
What I find important is the caution against ignoring voting. You can’t just “check out” and ignore elections without some dimension of sin. That’s a tough message!
How do you view voting? Think this old catechism is correct?
Say a Hail Mary for our country today. Or, if you can, a whole Rosary — it is obvious we need some victories.
Photo by Kheel Center, Cornell University 
This article, What the Catechism said on voting 100 years ago is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
https://bellarmineforum.org/what-the-catechism-said-on-voting-100-years-ago/
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.