I know it's off topic for the forum, and I'll remove it (or accept its removal) if mods so decide. But I encourage you who are arguing over two bad choices to look a little farther, and consider something like Instant Runoff Voting. With the current system, it is BAD for a candidate to have a position too close to another's. With IRL, the situation is greatly improved. (Another name is Ranked-Choice voting).
I don't wish to drag things off topic and so will respond unusually briefly for me.
The Utah GOP used IRV in our conventions for a bit. I was initially a supporter as I was sold on the idea that it worked just like separate ballots, only faster. The results were not as promised by those who advocated for IRV. I, and most others in the party are now very much opposed to the use of IRV. Within county and State GOP conventions we have moved to using wireless, remote voting devices so delegates don't even have to leave their seats to vote. I personally have some security concerns. But those concerns are less than the downsides of what I observed actually happening when we used IRV.
All ranked choice voting methods have problems. Failure to meet the
Monotonicity Criterion is chief among most of the popular methods.
Condorcet Voting is the "best" ranked choice voting method for satisfying various mathematical criteria for "fairness", but the tabulation is so complex that you are effectively required to trust the results of the computer to tell you who won.
Perhaps most importantly, as we look around the world at nations with robust multi-party systems, we don't see that necessarily leading to better legislative outcomes. It is natural for great contests to resolve down to two sides. In our system, we the voters make that determination before and at the election. In Parliamentary nations, the powers-that-be decide what alliances will be after they are safely elected. I'm not at all convinced the latter is better than the former.
Nor do I claim to have great solutions for when the GOP candidate is only slightly less bad than the overly gun-grabbing, freedom hating Democrat. What I do believe is that for every complex problem, there is a simple solution that is probably wrong. I think ranked choice voting is one of those simple, but wrong solutions. I much prefer physical run-off elections in the rare cases where nobody gets a majority.