I could be wrong, but I think the purpose of strategic voting in the US would be to secure swing states for Hillary in order to defeat Trump.

The idea is basically that if you want to vote 3rd party in a swing state (a so-called “protest vote”), you should instead trade your 3rd party vote with a Hillary voter in an uncontested state. This way, you help defeat Trump while still ensuring a vote for your 3rd party candidate. Maybe this can even get your 3rd party past the 5% threshold for federal convention funds or the 15% threshold to be included in the next election debates.

I don’t think any reasonable person would expect one of the 3rd party candidates to actually win the election somehow. Especially not by splitting the electoral college votes to force a vote in Congress.

We’re building a site like this now. Feel free to help if you’re at all interested in helping us defeat trump.

PS: The Jill Stein “anti-vaccine” thing you link to wasn’t very anti-vaccine-y. The point she was trying to make was succinctly expressed near the end:

We need to take the corporate influence out of government so people will trust our health authorities, and the rest of the government for that matter. End the revolving door. Appoint qualified professionals without a financial interest in the product being regulated. Create public funding of elections to stop the buying of elections by corporations and the super-rich.