Would ranked choice voting make it easier for third parties to be elected and help eliminate the two-party monopoly?

[KelleyNice]

RCV allows voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference: one, two, three, and four. If your vote cannot help your top choice win, your vote counts for your next choice.

If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices in races where voters elect one winner, that candidate wins, just like in a single-choice election. However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as ‘number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with more than half of the vote.

[N192K001]

Yup, and I support it!

The 2-party system has failed the U. S. While I'd want an immediate switch to a multi-party system with proportional-representation (as opposed to the current winner-takes-all), ranked-choice voting is a definite 1st step.

Luckily, initiatives are already being done across the Union.

[KelleyNice]

Thank you. Proportional-representation is something that never occurred to me. Perhaps that can be the subject of another question.

[Britchie]

Yes it would make it easier. I would like a libertarian to win, or at least cause democrat or republican candidates to feel like they need to try to win the libertarian vote by supporting libertarian policy prescriptions.

[monorprise]

If we followed the Federal Constitution, States could implement any voting system they want without effecting any other state. This is because even elections for federal officials are practically state elections thanks to systems like the electoral cottage.

[Anonymous]

I don't think the 2 party system is responsible for most of the problems we have with government.

I think even if you had a 1000 candidates to choose from, we still wouldn't agree upon anyone able to handle all of the hundreds of very different issues the office they are running for has assumed power over.

Instead we would be largely forced to focus on only a few cherry picked issues leaving all the rest for the politician do what they want with which is usually sell to the highest bidder to enrich themselfs, or buy spesfic votes.

Modern civilization works only because we are able to employ and hold accountable specialist in every area. That is people who can be experts in any particular area by focusing exclusively on it. We do this with the vote of our wallets based upon their track records in that area.

Politicians on the other hand are elected with ballots thus their only defining skill is their ability to get elected. Yet the office they command gives them power over almost everything almost none of which they have any skill or expertise in.

It doesn't matter whether or not you elect them thou a party primary system or a complicated ranked choice system. There is no one we could agree on who would be good in all areas. Even if we could agree what is good and we can't because we all have different definitions for different reasons.

[Chazmatazz269]

Interesting. I’m in!
I also like the forced union by which the presidential candidate with the most votes becomes president, and the second most votes becomes vice president. No more white house monopoly! And the f*ckers have to figure out how to work together day in and day out. It’s like putting two badly behaving kids in the same “time out” chair until they make up. Ell oh ell!

[FreyaRed]

It's not two party but one party monopoly. Don't let distract you with tie colors, two, three of even four different tie colors don't change the monopoly anyway.

[Adaeva]

Yes, because the only reason other parties are not elected is people believe they can't win.

[MikeInHawaii]

I’ve supported this for years. I’ve been active on the Libertarian Party since the ‘80’s and get sick of the “wasted vote” argument.

[MikeInHawaii]

And, by the way, two parties make a “duopoly,” not a “monopoly.”

[DWornock]

I'm not certain it would make it easier to elect 3rd parties but it would be a big improvement.

[ArtemisSilver]

Yes, it's also excellent for voting on a party leader.

[SixFootSexy]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/NAtunJv6NtE

I'm ready for Gil.

[globetrotter22]

Hey I had a political question I was wondering if we could collaborate on. Can you DM me please? thanks.