No, not voting is simply not voting. More to the point, not voting is “explicitly” saying you don’t care enough to spend the time or energy on casting a vote or you couldn’t vote. A person might think it implicitly* says “either choice is equally good”, but then I could argue that the Democrat party implicitly considers “either choice equally good” because they didn’t attempt to earn the votes.
When it’s easier to not vote than come out to vote, then the responsibility is on the candidates to convince their potential constituents to turn out for them.
By claiming people must vote for the “lesser evil” and nothing else then the party of “lesser evil” implicitly paves the way for people to stop showing up for them, which to that side paves the way for their greater evil to eventually win. -If you think that’s selfish and entitled, then that’s your prerogative, but if you want people support your candidate then you have to get them to want to support your candidate, be it selfish or not.