Strategic voting cynical, may not work: prof

Last week on As It Happens, we heard the case for casting a strategic ballot come election day. The advocacy group Leadnow is targeting Conservative candidates who might win by slim margins. Their Vote Together campaign urges Canadians to back whichever non-Conservative has the best chance of beating them. 

The group says a strategic vote is the best way to address what it calls our broken democracy. But one political watcher warns that strategic voting is cynical - and may not even work. 

"It concerns me because it brings voters not to vote with their conviction, but rather with a calculation," tells Antonia Maioni, a professor of political science at McGill University, to As It Happens guest host Laura Lynch. "I think that's a very sketchy and non-scientific way of thinking about voting."

Maioni adds that for strategic voting to be effective, a large number of people in one riding have to be using the technique, and there's little evidence so far that's happening.

Maioni says she favours something called "sincere voting," in which the voter does not use a calculus at the ballot box, and simply votes for the candidate that best represents their interests and views. 

She adds that she doesn't buy the argument that strategic voting is another tool to get people more interested in the electoral process. Maioni recognizes how Canada's current "first past the post" system can lead some people to feel their votes are wasted, but it's still better than the more cynical alternative. 

"I can't imagine that voting with conviction is a wasted vote, even if it doesn't translate into your exact preference outside the ballot box."