Yes, trolley problems are simple and reality is complex. We know this. The point of a trolley problem is not to provide a complete model for decision making in general, but to extract single data points about our preferences. imperfect information must be dealt with using probability distributions and expected utility; secondary effects must be included in our expected utility calculations. Indecision is irrelevant, in the same sense that someone facing Omega's problem with a time limit might leave someone with zero boxes. And of course, we do have to spend resources looking for third options, but that doesn't mean every problem will ultimately provide one.

Also, this would be better without the example from politics. If you want to face a mind-killing problem, face it directly, taking special care to defuse the mind-killing aspects. If you just need an example for an unrelated point, then talk about Louis XVI during the French Revolution.

"a crucial part of that is getting people to adopt an identity of critical thinking"

What to do about folks who believe/trumpet that they have adopted such an identity, and use this as a shield against conflicting arguments?