I have a lot of problems with people advocating strategic voting in the current Canadian electoral system.
Why? Because I have the same main argument as Alice Funke (of the excellent Punditsguide.ca political data website) on this. Nobody could predict the results in 308 individual ridings especially when people can vote for the party, the candidate, the party leader or any other factor.
The other snake oil/voodoo science argument is that first and second choices are static between parties and not based on individuality of the voter. Well, I know some Liberals who would NEVER vote for the NDP, just like in the 90’s, some Progressive Conservatives would never voted for the Reform Party or the Canadian Alliance just like the opposite could happens.
And where were these people in the 1997 or 2000 federal election? Or in the 1990 provincial election in Ontario, the 1996 election in British Columbia or the 1994 or 1998 election in Québec? Except for a few organisations which some of them are quite coherent on this subject, I have never seen people saying that the results of these elections were undemocratic even if a party is winning the popular vote and losing the seat total more than a few days after the election as they go on with something else. When you go into the political arena, you must accept the rules of the game at first.
Oh yes, when it’s their party who is winning a majority of seats, they remain weirdly very silent. People tend to like the current electoral system when it’s going their way, and this is quite human and comprehensible of course both for individuals and political parties!