[deleted] t1_j5336hm wrote on January 20, 2023 at 1:30 AM

What happens if a person only ranks one candidate?

As polarized as our country is I could see a significant portion of voters only ranking one candidate (the republican or democrat) that they would have voted for regardless. I have read about this happening with a subset of voters in last year’s election in Alaska.

I’m neutral to the idea of RCV but this is an aspect that I have never understood.

I get that people believe it could promote 3rd party and independent candidates but I have less faith in people actually using it as intended.

squirreltalk OP t1_j533rib wrote on January 20, 2023 at 1:35 AM

I think there's various ways of dealing with that, and different election systems do different things. I believe in Australia, if you don't rank all candidates, your ballot is voided.

[deleted] t1_j534cwg wrote on January 20, 2023 at 1:39 AM

A system where all candidates have to be ranked would solve the problem I proposed.

If that was the case here then I would support RCV.

gslavik t1_j53fx85 wrote on January 20, 2023 at 3:04 AM

> What happens if a person only ranks one candidate?

That's called bullet voting. We technically already do that. You rank your most preferred candidate and if they get eliminated, they get eliminated.

Ranked choice allows you to vote (as an example) for a 3rd party candidate with whom you agree more and still have a backup.

The issue with having to rank all candidates is when you end up with 20 candidates that are eligible. In NYC, for example, their last primaries were ranked choice and the Democratic party had over 10 candidates.

IMHO, the way Alaska does it, is a bit nicer. I'd prefer if all eligible candidates simply ended up on the ballot regardless of party affiliation and then parties can endorse whatever candidates they want.

[deleted] t1_j53kd4d wrote on January 20, 2023 at 3:37 AM

Just to be clear I have no issue with people wanting to promote third party and independent candidates (in fact I believe it would be a good thing).

I’m just skeptical that RCV would ever yield these results in reality. On paper it sounds promising but I don’t know how that would translate to the real world.

I feel like people would still effectively just vote for a Democrat or Republican by either only ranking one candidate or just continually ranking R’s and D’s number 1.

You bring up a decent point about ranking a plethora of candidates being a tedious process.

Maybe rank choice voting is the way to combat the stigma of voting third party but I feel like it’s a steep hill to overcome.

gslavik t1_j53mdgk wrote on January 20, 2023 at 3:53 AM

You bring up a good point and that is definitely a concern. Only counter argument I have is that RCV doesn't make things worse.

In NYC, they let you rank 5 candidates. In Alaska, they have a primary that is essentially plurality and top 3 go into general where RCV determines the winner (it was 2 Republicans and 1 Democrat in the last election).

There are definitely ways to solve this that can be done on computerized ballots and on paper ballots. We can print a 20x20 grid of bubbles, I am sure. Alternatively, use a computer to create the list that is then printed, scanned and counted (so you have a paper ballot that can be manually verified and an electronic count for a much quicker result).

BufloSolja t1_j54zh6r wrote on January 20, 2023 at 1:05 PM

RCV would allow ppl to pick 3rd party voters if they wanted to for first choice. As it is now, most ppl don't because they won't realistically win because they don't think enough other people will vote, and also as their vote will be 'wasted'.

With RCV essentially leading to more first rank votes to 3rd parties, they do increase the chance for victory, but mainly it will be a better way to see the opinions of the public imo.