Dear Prof. Tao,
You’re of course free to delete this comment and change your blog policy at whim. (Is this still a math research blog? I came here looking for “[u]pdates on [your] research and expository papers, discussion of open problems, and other maths-related topics”, and certainly not expecting to be bombarded with political propaganda.)
But to the substance of your post: I actually agree with your Proposition 1. In turn, I present for your consideration Proposition 2: Hillary Clinton is unfit to be President of the United States. As proof, I offer the Benghazi fiasco and the illegal storage of classified emails on a private server (most likely to avoid FOIA requests), which has already caused the country significant damage.
This is not exactly a tu-quoque retort. Rather, this is a question to you and your readers: What is a nation to do when both of its two major-party presidential nominees are unfit for the high office? (Aside from mourning the sad state of affairs, that is.)
One answer would be to bring out the pitchforks. Barring that, when both candidates are unfit for office, fitness ceases to be a relevant criterion. So personality, likability, and the very visceral consideration of “which one is more likely to look out for me” come to the forefront.
Trump voters are not (all) idiots; you can be assured that this one is not. Logically accepting Prop. 1 does not entail pulling the lever for Hillary.