You're probably following the debate that's going down between me and a couple of people who seem to have got it into their heads that the AD need their help to make a point.
The basic argument being used is that the big parties, which is hardly surprising, have sought to sew up the electoral process to exclude the smaller ones. If it were not for the fact that one of the smaller parties is the Alternattiva Demokratika, I'd say this was a good thing. The democratic scene is not improved by having thinly-disguised racists and marginal delusionals polluting the environment, even if they do provide some passing amusement.
It is perhaps unfortunate that the nature of the political arena does not, as a matter of stark reality, allow the more idealistic players to gain traction. Such is the polarisation of the electorate, a polarisation unsurprisingly aided and abetted by the Big Two, that votes are cast to maintain or upset the status quo and the status quo is what it is: you're either going to get Labour or you're going to get PN. There's nothing in between and for there to be something in between, tectonic plates are going to have to shift, which is hardly likely to happen.
Why does the electorate looks at things like this? I have to think that voters are just not prepared to take the risk. The "risk" is from the PN point of view, of course, because AD is not a natural home for MLP voters by any means, except for those for whom Sant is not the bee's knees. It is extremely likely, to the point of virtual certainty, that AD will not get any seats, and a significant erosion of the PN vote will let in the MLP.
In a "normal" situation, this might not be such a tragedy, but the manner in which Labour have chosen to fight the election, with smothering negativity, unproven allegations and an utter lack of policy (other than such policies as are made up on the hoof or nicked from the PN) should again make voting in Labour a non-starter in the minds of many people. In this situation, going for AD to wave a couple of fingers at the PN, or because some Minister or other has annoyed you, or just because you feel sympathetic towards them, is not going to do anything other than achieve what you don't want: Sant as PM. If you wanted him as PM, you'd vote for him, after all.
We saw this effect in the last round, when the clear and present danger that the EU Referendum "Yes" vote would be binned made voting for Sant more than slightly perverse.
What has changed this time around? He's not said he'll take us out of the EU - not overtly, anyway, though how he expects to rengotiate the Acquis is not immediately clear, given that he can't do that little thing. Has Sant proposed any policies that are attractive? Has Sant proposed any policies, for that matter? He's been far too preoccupied with the smear card he decided to play, ignoring the fact that the polls show that corruption is not uppermost in people's minds.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to try to kid you that some corruption doesn't exist (and won't continue to exist whoever is elected) but the so-called evidence that Sant is so smug about is really flimsy - and I really do get irritated by people like him, who go around crying "shame, shame" but when challenged, run away.
And to make his position even less palatable, when pressed for evidence Sant just smirks and says "the whole country knows about it, why are you asking me?" or "I've got evidence, promise, cross my heart and hope to die, but I can't show it to you". Sorry, mate, that sort of cheap line won't wash: go to the police with the evidence, don't store it up to attack people you think are threats. Oh, I forgot, the police are useless, aren't they? Just accomplices in the cover-up, aren't they?
The thing is, AD are not a viable option for other reasons, too. Unfortunately, their campaign has become too much of a "bash PN to get votes" gig for comfort. It's understandable why they're bashing the PN, because you can't really bash an Opposition that's failed to commit itself to any policy or measure that anyone can object to. Labour has prevaricated about anything and everything that might lose it a vote, whether it's the hunters' now obvious determination to defy the law or secular society's aspiration to remove religious influences from the policy making process or reforming the rent laws, and if you don't make waves in these areas, AD can't (or won't) attack you.
And then there's the sort of people who have associated themselves with AD. There are, among them, individuals for whom confidentiality and avoiding conflicts of interest are not sacred tenets (not that many politicians hold these principles in high regard, to be frank). Some form part of the mainstream of AD politics, others are just peripheral, but the sum total of this equation is that AD have become yet another political party striving for power in any way they can get it. They are no longer an extremely effective lobby group. OK, that's a choice they're perfectly entitled to make, but they can't turn the clock back and expect people to cut them any slack. They're in the kitchen and will have to take the heat, part of which is people like me pointing out that a vote for them is a vote for the party you don't want to govern the country.
The bottom line, which is the only line that counts, is that AD can realistically dent Gonzi's chances of being PM and all they will achieve is the satisfaction (satisfaction?) of seeing Sant running the country. The choice is yours: if you are genuinely committed to the AD cause, then I disagree with you but respect your choice. If you're not, then I have to say that I'm not impressed with the way you've decided to play games with my country's future.