I can’t see how anyone with a brain would not vote against #2. Because you’ve been around long enough to have been in this situation before. Voting #1 is at best a stop-gap measure. Option #1 doesn’t do anything to fix the underlying problem, and in fact, the next time around, #2 is way worse. (As is #1.) And this pattern keeps repeating. It doesn’t matter which you choose, you’ll end up with #2, just a bit later. (We’ve reached the stage at which genocide support is the lesser evil, fer chrissakes.) As an analogy, the situation we have with the two parties is like a choice faced by person with Type 2 diabetes: Fall into a hypoglycemic coma right now and maybe die, or consume sugar by the spoonful. The second option is the correct choice, obviously. But next time around, it’s the same choice, and again after that. This person can choose the lesser evil every time, but it still leads to death. So, painful and unlikely at it may be, some voters are thinking beyond the immediate moment and want to at least try to avoid the death of democracy.