The better strategy

Hat-tip to Calgary Grit in pointing out the Democratic Space Strategic Voting Guide. What's most striking about the Guide is that even if one planned to vote strategically, the Guide doesn't suggest such a vote in more than 10% of Canadian ridings for voters of any party.

And even some of those very few are based on less-than-clear dividing lines. For example, take a look at the recommended strategic vote in Edmonton-Strathcona, where the third-place NDP (a) has projected ahead of the second-place Libs earlier in the campaign, and (b) is within two or three points of second place now, while the Lib candidate projects to be five-plus points behind the winner.

Obviously a project such as the Guide must be based on somewhat arbitrary distinctions as to who has a chance and who doesn't. But when the system recommends taking strategic votes away from a third-place contender projected to win 27% of the vote, it's apparent that the low number of strategic ridings is despite a system which fairly generously suggests strategic voting, rather than because of one that's biased against strategic votes.

The Guide is certainly interesting information, and I'm glad to see someone make the effort to try to give voters a better look at where their strategic vote might be needed. But more than anything, the Guide simply points out the futility of trying to project the current election based on past numbers - and the concurrent value of voting on principle rather than strategy.