This article is infuriating. I'm glad you wrote it; I'm just so frustrated that so many states write ballot initiatives that are intentionally misleading or difficult to follow and also that so many states intentionally try to make voting more difficult and easier to manipulate.
It couldn't be more obvious that "red" states and conservative politicians know their policies are wildly unpopular among Americans who generally enjoy the benefits of a liberal (little L) government. Gerrymandering, making voting more difficult, making voting more confusing, doing the best they can to give power to parties instead of Americans. It's such a joke.
And yes, voter disenfranchisement happens from "blue" areas as well, but not nearly to extent to it's being perpetrated by the Republican party (because people actually like social safety nets, investment in infrastructure, making voting easy, etc...). Ugh...
I wish we had more politicians who had the courage and confidence to help Americans understand their options and make their won choices instead of spending so much time and energy manipulating into the options that empower politicians at the expense of their constituents. I'm not really sure how to get there....
Notice how *red* states oppose anything that attempts to give more power to "We the People"? Just like the electoral college -- less fair favors Republicans.
The GOP in Maine has been opposed to Ranked Choice Voting (though I would dispute their assertion that it is "widely opposed by voters in Maine"): https://www.mainegop.com/news/rcv
They have attempted to repeal it, and when that didn't work they opted to ignore it whenever and wherever they can. What's particularly frustrating is that Maine is a deeply purple state and it's not as though Republicans have historically been denied access to public office: our Governors have long been a mix of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Both of our US Congressional districts have gone back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, and two of our most well-known US Senators have been Republicans (Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe). Given that reality, it is hard to see how the current GOP's opposition to RCV is anything but a deeply partisan and self-serving position that does not reflect the needs or wants of our state.
Wouldn’t ranked choice also lead to candidates who are more closely aligned on policy (and actually willing to work together to get things done)? Maybe these people will be forced to better represent their people and not their pocket lining interests.
Thank you for this explanation! The proposition on the ballot in Missouri is to ban ranked choice voting, and I feel like people don't even know what it is! No wonder our red state government wants it banned! It would force them to be civil and use less dividing tactics to win a seat!
Fellow Missourian here👋. And the wording for the amendment is intentionally deceptive by having the first point that voters read, “Make the Constitution consistent with state law by only allowing citizens of the United States to vote." That’s already in the constitution!! So voters will likely read that, decide yes, I want to prohibit non-citizens from voting, and then ignore the rest. Infuriating
MO, same! That’s why I put together a voting guide to share with everyone I know. In it, I ask, “why would I want to vote for an obvious lie, and why would I want to pre-emptively give away my right to choose a different voting method in the future?” It’s insulting!
Thank you for this post! It’s going to help me spread the word in MO!
I voted early in Idaho and I fully support Proposition 1. Only 3 races on my ballot were contested. There were several other races on the ballot but they had all been decided in the primary. These were important, local races. Turnout in the primary was less than 20% of registered voters and they decided for everyone. The rhetoric and propaganda against Prop 1 has been astounding I.e. “Don’t Californicate Idaho” signs are everywhere. And yes, this is from the “Family Values” party. SMH
I came here to say just that! I’m in Boise and those signs are everywhere! Both my son and I are not allowed to vote in the primary as we aren’t registered to a party… so frustrating! We completed the assignment 😉 during early voting and voted yes for prop 1!! 💙
People know how to rank things. We do it all the time! Here's my top 5 favorite movies, songs, breakfast foods, etc. I think where some people may get confused is when you tabulate the votes and the one with the least votes drops out and then you move to the second choice for those people. Sharon explains it well here. I would love to see ranked choice voting implemented in more places. I feel like it gives the voter more say, which is always a good thing!
Yes, the major draw back to Ranked Choice Voting is communicating the results. The process of ranking for voters isn't that hard to grasp once voters are introduced to the process, the issue is more that the results can be complex to understand.
That's one reason why Approval Voting can be an even more appealing voting method, because it also allows voters to show support for more than one candidate but without having to rank them and the process/results are much easier to understand. Approval Voting lets voters simply choose any candidate they approve of and the candidate who receives the most approval votes wins. Approval Voting offers the same benefits of Ranked Choice Voting and more.
Sharon, I asked this on your stories so by the time you see this you may have answered there… I’m in Colorado. What do you think about the notion that in a district that is heavily one party, say R, and they run 6 or 7 candidates for the primary and throw a ton of money at them - just so no D, no matter how moderate they are, or anyone else for that matter, will wind up in the top four? That is my concern and what I am curious about. Thoughts on that piece of it? Thank you.
I am 14 years old,and we use the preamble for homeschool social studies!
I think that ranked choice voting is a very good option to kind of knock some sense into the government.Candidates would stop mudslinging,people wouldn't have to care about a far in the opposite direction president,because if Linda is very far right,and Cindy is moderate,with Dave being far left,then there's a high chance that Cindy will win as the second option for Linda and Dave voters
I find it silly that each state makes such long winded propositions,and that some states banned ranked choice even without ever having it.
Washington, DC voter here who cast her ballot in favor of ranked choice voting. Interestingly, the only people I’ve heard speak against it is the party leadership of the Dems (and I’m a Dem). In a city where 80%+ of people are registered as Ds, it’s sad to me how threatened they feel by a more open process.
Yes, it is generally the case that whichever party currently has super-majority power in a specific state would not want to see changes to the voting method, because the current method is working *for them.*
Additionally, voting methods that allow voters to support more than one candidate, like Approval Voting or Ranked Choice Voting, are challenging to the two-party system, which means that generally both the Democrat and Republican parties would not support the change.
It really seems like any change to voting methods would have to be driven by citizen-initiated ballot measures AND citizen-initiated ballot measures are only allowed in 26 states.
This is such a good point! It's good to be aware that it's not just one party opposing RCV, because both parties knowingly benefit from the two-party system and from whatever majorities they can eek out of it.
Thank you for explaining this so well. As an Alaskan who loves ranked choice voting because it finally feels like our votes actually count, I’m very unhappy that people are trying to take it away with a ballot measure during this election. These are the people who are trying to force you to vote down party lines. We formerly had closed primaries, meaning if I wanted to vote for the people instead of the parties (i.e. a democrat AND a republican), I could not do that and had to choose one party’s path. It restricts my ability to vote for who I want. Ranked choice gives everyone the right and ability to vote for whomever they choose. I voted NO to repealing it.
Love this explainer, Sharon! For any Governerds that are curious about other voting methods, you might also want to check out Approval Voting; it has the same benefits as Ranked Choice Voting and *more.* The Center for Election Science explains:
"Approval voting is a method in which voters are allowed to select any number of candidates they approve of, rather than just one. In essence, it offers voters the opportunity to express their support for multiple candidates, without having to rank them in any specific order. The candidate with the highest overall approval, or the most votes, wins the election.
"Consequently, approval voting promotes consensus-building and diminishes polarization among voters, as candidates must strive to appeal to a wider range of supporters to secure victory in elections."
1. It can run on our current machines, which makes it very inexpensive and easy to pick up for communities and administrators.
2. The results are very simple to understand, e.g. Candidate A received 65% of voters approval, Candidate B received 47% of voters approval, Candidate C received 39% of voters approval. Capturing the actual support of candidates among voters can encourage more candidates to enter the race and allow for the proliferation of more political parties to better represent Americans as a whole.
3. You’re more likely to end up with a candidate that the majority of people can at least tolerate.
4. It can change candidate behavior. Rather than worrying whether you are a voter's favorite/first choice, you just have to win over any voter's approval regardless of what other candidate(s) they might support. Candidates who build coalitions and consensus do better in Approval Voting. Being hyper partisan is a bad strategy to win an Approval Voting election.
5. It eliminates vote-splitting as an issue, which means no candidate can ever be a “spoiler.” This issue can still be present in RCV depending on how a voter ranks candidates.
6. It can cost less money because you don’t have to have expensive runoff elections.
Approval Voting is currently being used in Fargo, North Dakota and St. Louis, Missouri.
The opposition to Approval Voting is much of the same as Ranked Choice Voting.
I’m an Alaska voter and I love that I get to use ranked-choice voting. Also it’s not lost on me that the GOP is leading the effort to get rid of it because our one House of Reps seat went to a Democrat in the last election, for the first time in forever. But I would argue that the election of a Democratic congresswoman is indicative of the shift in Alaska politics and more reflective of the actual electorate - sort of what ranked-choice voting is intended to do. Weird.
Wow I just learned so much. Thank you Sharon! I knew what ranked choice voting was and would love to have it in available in Pennsylvania. I can not believe that many states have already banned it. Shocking though I guess it should not have been. How disheartening.
This was so helpful! Thank you for explaining these processes without partisan hype or scaremongering. What we have isn’t working and it seems like the solution requires informed, respectful pursuit of a better way.
This article is infuriating. I'm glad you wrote it; I'm just so frustrated that so many states write ballot initiatives that are intentionally misleading or difficult to follow and also that so many states intentionally try to make voting more difficult and easier to manipulate.
It couldn't be more obvious that "red" states and conservative politicians know their policies are wildly unpopular among Americans who generally enjoy the benefits of a liberal (little L) government. Gerrymandering, making voting more difficult, making voting more confusing, doing the best they can to give power to parties instead of Americans. It's such a joke.
And yes, voter disenfranchisement happens from "blue" areas as well, but not nearly to extent to it's being perpetrated by the Republican party (because people actually like social safety nets, investment in infrastructure, making voting easy, etc...). Ugh...
I wish we had more politicians who had the courage and confidence to help Americans understand their options and make their won choices instead of spending so much time and energy manipulating into the options that empower politicians at the expense of their constituents. I'm not really sure how to get there....
Notice how *red* states oppose anything that attempts to give more power to "We the People"? Just like the electoral college -- less fair favors Republicans.
The GOP in Maine has been opposed to Ranked Choice Voting (though I would dispute their assertion that it is "widely opposed by voters in Maine"): https://www.mainegop.com/news/rcv
They have attempted to repeal it, and when that didn't work they opted to ignore it whenever and wherever they can. What's particularly frustrating is that Maine is a deeply purple state and it's not as though Republicans have historically been denied access to public office: our Governors have long been a mix of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Both of our US Congressional districts have gone back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, and two of our most well-known US Senators have been Republicans (Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe). Given that reality, it is hard to see how the current GOP's opposition to RCV is anything but a deeply partisan and self-serving position that does not reflect the needs or wants of our state.
Wouldn’t ranked choice also lead to candidates who are more closely aligned on policy (and actually willing to work together to get things done)? Maybe these people will be forced to better represent their people and not their pocket lining interests.
Thank you for this explanation! The proposition on the ballot in Missouri is to ban ranked choice voting, and I feel like people don't even know what it is! No wonder our red state government wants it banned! It would force them to be civil and use less dividing tactics to win a seat!
Fellow Missourian here👋. And the wording for the amendment is intentionally deceptive by having the first point that voters read, “Make the Constitution consistent with state law by only allowing citizens of the United States to vote." That’s already in the constitution!! So voters will likely read that, decide yes, I want to prohibit non-citizens from voting, and then ignore the rest. Infuriating
MO, same! That’s why I put together a voting guide to share with everyone I know. In it, I ask, “why would I want to vote for an obvious lie, and why would I want to pre-emptively give away my right to choose a different voting method in the future?” It’s insulting!
Thank you for this post! It’s going to help me spread the word in MO!
Yes, the wording is very deceptive! I'd love to see your voting guide, Gina!
Sorry, I don’t know how to message you from here to share it.
Gina -- I *think* you can right-click in the comment box--then 'paste' (???). I too would like to see your voter guide.
Thank you. Is there a way to respond to just one person, so that I may share it with you privately?
In Missouri too- that really infuriates me too
I voted early in Idaho and I fully support Proposition 1. Only 3 races on my ballot were contested. There were several other races on the ballot but they had all been decided in the primary. These were important, local races. Turnout in the primary was less than 20% of registered voters and they decided for everyone. The rhetoric and propaganda against Prop 1 has been astounding I.e. “Don’t Californicate Idaho” signs are everywhere. And yes, this is from the “Family Values” party. SMH
I came here to say just that! I’m in Boise and those signs are everywhere! Both my son and I are not allowed to vote in the primary as we aren’t registered to a party… so frustrating! We completed the assignment 😉 during early voting and voted yes for prop 1!! 💙
I’m I. two. falls. It’s good to know we are not alone!
*in Twin Falls*
“But if people are capable of understanding the rules of football or how a video game works, they can understand how to do ranked choice voting.” 🎤🫳🏻
SHE SAID WHAT SHE SAID! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Thank you, Sharon, for telling it like it is.
People know how to rank things. We do it all the time! Here's my top 5 favorite movies, songs, breakfast foods, etc. I think where some people may get confused is when you tabulate the votes and the one with the least votes drops out and then you move to the second choice for those people. Sharon explains it well here. I would love to see ranked choice voting implemented in more places. I feel like it gives the voter more say, which is always a good thing!
Yes, the major draw back to Ranked Choice Voting is communicating the results. The process of ranking for voters isn't that hard to grasp once voters are introduced to the process, the issue is more that the results can be complex to understand.
That's one reason why Approval Voting can be an even more appealing voting method, because it also allows voters to show support for more than one candidate but without having to rank them and the process/results are much easier to understand. Approval Voting lets voters simply choose any candidate they approve of and the candidate who receives the most approval votes wins. Approval Voting offers the same benefits of Ranked Choice Voting and more.
Sharon, I asked this on your stories so by the time you see this you may have answered there… I’m in Colorado. What do you think about the notion that in a district that is heavily one party, say R, and they run 6 or 7 candidates for the primary and throw a ton of money at them - just so no D, no matter how moderate they are, or anyone else for that matter, will wind up in the top four? That is my concern and what I am curious about. Thoughts on that piece of it? Thank you.
Hi!
I am 14 years old,and we use the preamble for homeschool social studies!
I think that ranked choice voting is a very good option to kind of knock some sense into the government.Candidates would stop mudslinging,people wouldn't have to care about a far in the opposite direction president,because if Linda is very far right,and Cindy is moderate,with Dave being far left,then there's a high chance that Cindy will win as the second option for Linda and Dave voters
I find it silly that each state makes such long winded propositions,and that some states banned ranked choice even without ever having it.
Washington, DC voter here who cast her ballot in favor of ranked choice voting. Interestingly, the only people I’ve heard speak against it is the party leadership of the Dems (and I’m a Dem). In a city where 80%+ of people are registered as Ds, it’s sad to me how threatened they feel by a more open process.
Ranked choice voting really changes the whole strategy for them. Anyone who doesn't want it says a lot about themselves!
Yes, it is generally the case that whichever party currently has super-majority power in a specific state would not want to see changes to the voting method, because the current method is working *for them.*
Additionally, voting methods that allow voters to support more than one candidate, like Approval Voting or Ranked Choice Voting, are challenging to the two-party system, which means that generally both the Democrat and Republican parties would not support the change.
It really seems like any change to voting methods would have to be driven by citizen-initiated ballot measures AND citizen-initiated ballot measures are only allowed in 26 states.
This is such a good point! It's good to be aware that it's not just one party opposing RCV, because both parties knowingly benefit from the two-party system and from whatever majorities they can eek out of it.
Thank you for explaining this so well. As an Alaskan who loves ranked choice voting because it finally feels like our votes actually count, I’m very unhappy that people are trying to take it away with a ballot measure during this election. These are the people who are trying to force you to vote down party lines. We formerly had closed primaries, meaning if I wanted to vote for the people instead of the parties (i.e. a democrat AND a republican), I could not do that and had to choose one party’s path. It restricts my ability to vote for who I want. Ranked choice gives everyone the right and ability to vote for whomever they choose. I voted NO to repealing it.
Love this explainer, Sharon! For any Governerds that are curious about other voting methods, you might also want to check out Approval Voting; it has the same benefits as Ranked Choice Voting and *more.* The Center for Election Science explains:
"Approval voting is a method in which voters are allowed to select any number of candidates they approve of, rather than just one. In essence, it offers voters the opportunity to express their support for multiple candidates, without having to rank them in any specific order. The candidate with the highest overall approval, or the most votes, wins the election.
"Consequently, approval voting promotes consensus-building and diminishes polarization among voters, as candidates must strive to appeal to a wider range of supporters to secure victory in elections."
https://electionscience.org/education/approval-voting
The benefits of Approval Voting are:
1. It can run on our current machines, which makes it very inexpensive and easy to pick up for communities and administrators.
2. The results are very simple to understand, e.g. Candidate A received 65% of voters approval, Candidate B received 47% of voters approval, Candidate C received 39% of voters approval. Capturing the actual support of candidates among voters can encourage more candidates to enter the race and allow for the proliferation of more political parties to better represent Americans as a whole.
3. You’re more likely to end up with a candidate that the majority of people can at least tolerate.
4. It can change candidate behavior. Rather than worrying whether you are a voter's favorite/first choice, you just have to win over any voter's approval regardless of what other candidate(s) they might support. Candidates who build coalitions and consensus do better in Approval Voting. Being hyper partisan is a bad strategy to win an Approval Voting election.
5. It eliminates vote-splitting as an issue, which means no candidate can ever be a “spoiler.” This issue can still be present in RCV depending on how a voter ranks candidates.
6. It can cost less money because you don’t have to have expensive runoff elections.
Approval Voting is currently being used in Fargo, North Dakota and St. Louis, Missouri.
The opposition to Approval Voting is much of the same as Ranked Choice Voting.
https://ballotpedia.org/Approval_voting
I’m an Alaska voter and I love that I get to use ranked-choice voting. Also it’s not lost on me that the GOP is leading the effort to get rid of it because our one House of Reps seat went to a Democrat in the last election, for the first time in forever. But I would argue that the election of a Democratic congresswoman is indicative of the shift in Alaska politics and more reflective of the actual electorate - sort of what ranked-choice voting is intended to do. Weird.
I’m in Colorado and while prop 131 sounds good, follow the money….over $9 million donated by CEOs to pass it. That worried me
My concern too and a little what I was getting at with my question a bit before you.
Wow I just learned so much. Thank you Sharon! I knew what ranked choice voting was and would love to have it in available in Pennsylvania. I can not believe that many states have already banned it. Shocking though I guess it should not have been. How disheartening.
This was so helpful! Thank you for explaining these processes without partisan hype or scaremongering. What we have isn’t working and it seems like the solution requires informed, respectful pursuit of a better way.