I feel like this is a misrepresentation of Marxs work either by misunderstanding his work or by not being familiar with his works. And not every Marxists waits for a revolution, it’s mostly orthodox Marxists (or Marxist-leninists) who are hoping for a revolution. Revisionist Marxists, such a democratic socialists, don’t necessarily believe in a revolution or even outright reject a revolution.

Being a Marxist doesn’t mean you need to agree with everything Marx wrote. I don’t agree with his revolutionary ideas, but I think his criticism of capitalism is accurate because I’ve yet to see any compelling counterarguments to his fundamental points. Me not agreeing with his inevitable revolution doesn’t mean I’m not a Marxist, it means I’m not an orthodox Marxist.

That’s hardly the reason. If you had a multi-party system the voted would be even more spread out between the candidates which makes it even less likely for a candidate to get more votes than the non-voting population. However a multi-party system would significantly lessen the possibility of getting oligarchic control because you wouldn’t have to choose between 2 shitty options, you’d have to have multiple shitty choices for the shittiest one to win.

There has not been an US presidential election where the president got more votes than the number of non-voters. If apathy won then it had won every single time.