According to Coindance, almost all nodes still support Core. btc1 nodes (Segwit2x) have almost no one using it.
There's a difference between running a node with X software, and supporting the positions of the related development team.
Talking as if running software = support is something that needs to stop. It's not correct.
I run a bitcoin core node but I often do not agree with the decisions made by the core team. There aren't millions of clients to cater to everyone's minute differences of opinion, so it's not exactly easy to 'show' your support in this manner.
I realize that not everyone is going to support every decision Core makes, but I would assume if someone supports Segwit2x they would at least be running the btc1 client. What is the rationale for not running a btc1 node if they have the intention of hardforking off the Core chain in November?
In a word: Inertia.
It's very easy for node operators to be lazy, myself included. You set and forget, and you don't care that much. It's on a server you don't use or log into very often, or it may be a remote server that you rarely look at, etc.
IMO this is a huge roadblock to progress with the bitcoin protocal, but it may be a benefit to network security...
So some good, some bad.
I dislike this inertia effect because it consolidates control and encourages extremely conservative behaviour. The conservative base further increases control as time goes on, regardless of whether that's the best course of action or not.
The more decisions that I disagree with, the more I feel pressured to act. Previously, I've been lazy and not bothered, but I think I might do a client changeover tonight.