WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR POLITICAL PARTIES IN RCV ELECTIONS?

Come-from-behind victories are rare in ranked choice voting (RCV) elections. Usually, the candidate leading after the first round of tallying wins the election after subsequent rounds of tallying. However, come-from-behind victories reveal how ranked choice voting mitigates vote splitting. In plurality elections, voters often feel locked into one choice. Pressure falls onto the voters to strategically cast their ballot so as not to split the vote. Under ranked choice voting, voters know their vote is redistributed to their second, third, and so on choices if their most preferred candidate does not receive enough votes. This means there is less pressure to vote strictly along party lines – making RCV more representative of the nuances of political choice and opinion. Thus, RCV rewards candidates with broad support – encouraging positive campaigning and reducing polarization.

So far in modern American elections, there have been four come-from-behind victories in partisan general elections. Two of those benefitted Republicans and two benefited Democrats, indicating that ranked choice voting is party-neutral. Instead, the outcomes of RCV elections depend on the circumstances of the elections, such as how many like-minded candidates are running against each other.

In the first RCV election in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District in 2018, Jared Golden (D) was the come-from-behind winner against the incumbent Bruce Poliquin (R) and two independent candidates. After the first round of tallying, Poliquin was leading with 46.33% of the vote. However, after the two independent candidates were eliminated in subsequent rounds, Golden emerged victorious with 50.6% of the vote. In this case, the Democratic party benefited from the use of RCV. 

In Alaska’s 18th state house district race in 2022, the ultimate winner – Democrat Cliff Groh – had a come-from-behind victory. The vote was originally split between the two Democratic candidates on the ballot. After the first round of voting, it appeared as though incumbent David Nelson (R) would win. Democratic candidate Lyn Franks was eliminated and 21% of the votes were reallocated. Ultimately, Groh won the election with 52% of the votes. In this case, RCV benefited the Democratic candidates.

In Alaska’s 11th district, two Republicans and one independent candidate ran. After the first round, the independent candidate – Walter Featherly – had a lead with 45.4% of the vote. Then, the Republican with the fewest votes was eliminated, resulting in Julie Coulombe (R) winning the race with 50.8% of the vote. In the 15th district, two Republicans and one Democratic candidate ran. When the voters’ first choices were tallied, Denny Wells (D) led with 46.6% of the vote. Ultimately, incumbent Thomas McKay (R) won by four votes. 

In Alaska’s 11th and 15th district races in 2022, Republicans benefited. If these results had been counted in non-ranked choice voting elections, the independent and Democratic candidates would have won their respective races after the first round of tallying. However, after the candidate with the lowest number of votes was eliminated, Republican candidates were elected in their respective districts.

RCV allows multiple candidates from the same party – or multiple different parties – to run without splitting the vote. Without ranked choice voting, when voters vote based on their true preferences rather than who they think is more likely to win, they risk giving a better chance to a candidate they dislike. In each of these come-from-behind cases, when more than one candidate on the same side of the spectrum runs, ranked choice voting works in those candidates’ favor. Citizens can vote in line with their own beliefs with the knowledge that if their preferred candidate gets eliminated, their vote still has power to help elect their second, third, fourth, and so on choices. 

Ranked choice voting elections motivate parties to produce candidates with both a deep and a broad base – decreasing polarization and increasing positive campaigning, no matter what party they represent.