That's fine. But if that how you approach an election you hand governence to the fascists. You can have the attitude that it's acceptable to take the lessor of two evils: But if you run a campaign or election in that manner, you lose the election.
It's not an acceptable or viable strategy which Democrats can use to win. They lose when they engage with your sentiment. It's remarkablely clear that voters don't respond to voting for the lessor evil. You can be mad about h that or angry with voters, but you can't keep living in denial of it as a stated fact.
Campaigns have to conform to voters for them to be successful. Politicians need to reach and meet voters where they are at and engage their policies and positions to conform to what voters want, or they lose elections.
We're not in the mess because of how voters behave. We've always known that the approach you outline loses elections. You should really grapple with the sentiment you are expressing here because the cognitive dissonance is within in this case.
In 2024 you had two Democratic candidates for president both refuse to go to where their voters were in terms of policy. And it lost an election. And your frustration is then repreojected onto voters. You've got it backwards. All of your frustration should be with the candidates who stepped away from where the votes they need to get elected were. And everyone with eyes saw this happening in 2024. Outside of party loyalists, no one was fooled by either Biden or Kamalas campaign or why it was happening.
The problem is that major Democratic campaigns refuse to acknowledge this and instead insist the voters conform to the corporate and AIPAC donors want. And what that class of donors wants from candidates loses elections.