OK, but stepping back from the very-specific, very-rare-as-to-be-practically-non-existent spouse-killing scenario, I myself believe there's a difference between voting third party because the positions of both major candidates are complete anathema to everyday life that would bring active harm to you, versus voting third party because even though you would be fine with one of the major candidates' winning, the third party guy is only marginally better than the major, or has a position you like the major doesn't that doesn't involve killing your spouse. In this case I could see the position that in the latter case, it would be better to set aside the slight preference of the third party guy in favor of the guy you would accept if he won instead, while in the former case, a third party vote is very defensible. Would like your take on this.