That's as true for Mississippi Democrats as it is for Conservative Londoners as it is for Alberta Liberals.
We need to get over this idea that a voting system, and a voting system alone, will beget increased agency/empowerment with respect to feelings of "throwing away their vote". Voters are beyond cynical; many have just given up even trying to understand what goes on day-to-day in Parliament. As a result, when asked, a whole whack of people will mix up what goes on in their province and what goes on in Ottawa. Which for whatever reason, gets treated as "they're not paying attention therefore we can do what we want." Creating, in the end, this cycle of disengagement/disenfranchisement that won't be fixed with a more involved voting system.
Why don't we talk about agency and empowerment in terms of "throwing away their vote" because "all parties are the same" and will act no matter their stripe or who votes for them. That's a greater concern in terms of breaking the cynicism cycle than strategic voting on account of geography. Strategic voting and "I'm an x voter in a y riding" implies at least some degree of engagement with the system, writ large, whereas "everyone's the same" implies little-to-no depth of awareness and engagement at all. (On the premise that you have to know enough about your local area and riding and political representation to feel you're outnumbered and therefore don't count, while you don't have to know anything at all to dismiss political parties as "all the same" with no further explanation.)
Thinking about the problem of non-engagement and non-voting in this way, the solutions are less about the electoral system and more about education, grassroots leadership, and changes to party structures.
That's not to say the electoral system should not be changed - but, rather, that we should look at other ways to increase agency and empowerment first.
