The polls are still too close to call — but this week we finally got some election numbers we can bank on. More than three and a half million Canadians voted in advanced polls and 70,231 electors voted as part of an Elections Canada pilot project at select campuses, Friendship Centres and YMCAs across the country.

Whatever happens on October 19, voter turnout at advanced polls is up 71 per cent over 2011 numbers — and that’s a victory for all Canadians. As the remaining 22.3 million eligible electors decide how to cast their ballot in the midst of last-minute political attacks and counter-attacks, we need to remember that every vote counts — no matter who it’s for.

There’s been a lot of talk over the past few years about how our electoral system is broken, and how it might be fixed by abandoning first-past-the-post. Certainly, democratic processes need to evolve as citizens and notions of citizenship change over time. Electoral innovation — making the system more secure, accessible, diverse and engaging — is something we should be talking about.

But in the act of trying to get electoral reform on the national agenda, many critics have made two significant mistakes. First, they’ve assumed that the only kind of electoral innovation possible amounts to changing the way ballots are counted. Second, they’ve thrown around language implying that, in our current system, an individual vote doesn’t count. This is counterproductive and damaging rhetoric.

As citizens head to the ballot box, they most certainly should consider electoral reform an issue they might vote for or against. But they should also remember that, even in our flawed electoral system, voting is a numbers game — and a single vote can matter a great deal.

Everyone who chooses not to vote arguably increases the weight of everyone else’s vote in a given race, especially when the race is a close one. Failing to vote is not a neutral act. Everyone who chooses not to vote arguably increases the weight of everyone else’s vote in a given race, especially when the race is a close one. Failing to vote is not a neutral act.

Just ask Robert McDonald, who lost a 2012 city council election in the U.S. when one person — his wife — failed to cast what would have been a tie-breaking vote. “If she had just been able to get in to vote, we wouldn’t be going through any of this,” McDonald said. “You never think it will come down to one vote, but I’m here to tell you that it does.”

There are plenty of Canadian examples that tell a similar story. In the 2011 election, the five closest races were all won by less then 100 votes — one riding by an astoundingly narrow margin of nine votes.

Everyone who chooses not to vote arguably increases the weight of everyone else’s vote in a given race, especially when the race is a close one. Failing to vote is not a neutral act.

It is easy to forget, as we get wrapped up in the horserace, that voting isn’t just about winning. Some electoral reform advocates would have you believe that your vote doesn’t count if it doesn’t send a representative of your chosen party to Ottawa. But democracy is about compromise — and winning isn’t the only reason to play.

An election is one of the few times when something you can do as an ordinary citizen will have exactly the same impact on the politics of the nation as what Stephen Harper, Elizabeth May, Justin Trudeau or Thomas Mulcair do. We all get just one vote — meaning that, for a moment, we are truly equal as citizens.

There will plenty of time afterward to argue about what happened in this campaign. Right now, let’s all make sure we encourage our friends, neighbours, kids and colleagues to get out the polls. When we vote, we win — no matter who loses.

Ilona Dougherty is co-founder of Apathy is Boring, a national non-partisan charitable organization that uses art and technology to educate youth about democracy and encourages them to vote. She is a regular commentator in national media, a published author, and speaks to audiences internationally about redefining intergenerational relationships and encouraging active citizenship.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.