Ranked choice voting can promote stronger political parties
Although increasing gridlock and polarization have fueled rising anti-party sentiment among Americans, political parties remain a vital part of modern democracy. Parties give voters information about their choices, organize to win elections, and help elected officials govern when in office. Therefore, reformers should consider how to make parties healthier rather than simply weakening them – that is, to better align the incentives of parties with the needs of voters.
Ranked choice voting (RCV) is a reform that can strengthen political parties while also centering voters. RCV gives voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference. If a voter’s first choice can’t win, their vote counts for their next choice.
When used in party primaries, RCV strengthens nominees and helps political parties put their best foot forward in the general election. When used in general elections, RCV solves the “spoiler” problem, and also encourages parties to engage in broader voter outreach and build deeper connections with local communities. RCV also provides smaller parties new opportunities to organize and elevate their own candidates without playing “spoiler.”
Read on for more information about how political parties can benefit from ranked choice voting – and examples from elections across the country.
How political parties benefit from ranked choice voting in primaries
In most states, candidates can win primary elections with a plurality (less than 50%) of votes, as long as they have more votes than their opponents. This may produce a nominee who only a small fraction of the party supports. As a result, parties often send unpopular nominees to otherwise winnable races. Research shows that nominees who win their primary with a plurality are 10.4 percentage points less likely to win in competitive general elections.
For example, in 2022, Republicans lost several competitive elections after advancing nominees who won their primaries with a plurality of votes. Those nominees include Doug Mastriano, who ran to be Pennsylvania’s governor; Blake Masters, who ran for an Arizona U.S. Senate seat; and Mehmet Oz, who ran for a Pennsylvania U.S. Senate seat.
In seats that are safe for one party, representatives can effectively be chosen by a fraction of a fraction of the electorate. These plurality primary winners can disproportionately impact how their party functions in office. For example, six of the eight Republican members of Congress who voted to oust former House Speaker Kevin McCarty in 2023 were first elected with a minority of Republican primary votes in hyper-partisan districts.
RCV primaries, on the other hand, produce strong nominees who have support from a majority of the party’s voters. Party voters enter the general election more united and enthusiastic, since most voters will have supported the nominee as either their first choice or a backup choice.
This benefit of RCV has been observed in practice. In 2021, Virginia Republicans used RCV to nominate their winning slate of candidates for statewide office, including Governor Glenn Youngkin. These were the first statewide elections the party had won in 12 years, and Republicans flipped the House of Delegates on those coattails. Pennsylvania Democrats, Indiana Republicans, and Utahns of both parties have likewise used RCV to nominate strong candidates in important races. State parties in Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, Wyoming, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have used RCV in presidential primaries.
Additionally, RCV incentivizes candidates to run positive campaigns because negative attacks may lose them the crucial backup-choice support necessary to win. This helps winning and losing candidates alike maintain higher favorability ratings, keeping the party’s bench of candidates strong for future elections. For instance, a 2022 poll by the Center for Campaign Innovation found that Republican voters in an RCV congressional primary had more positive views of the candidates than voters in a nearby district that used single-choice voting. 56% of voters in the RCV district preferred RCV to a single-choice voting.
How political parties benefit from ranked choice voting in general elections
In the past 30 years, over 50 U.S. senators have been elected with less than 50% of votes. This is a symptom of the “spoiler” problem – that is, when third-party and independent candidates siphon votes from major-party candidates, which can cause the major-party candidate closer to their platform to lose. Major parties spend a great deal of time and money trying to ward off candidates that “spoil” their chances, or sometimes even prop up candidates who might spoil the race for the opposing major party. These tactics can sour voters’ perceptions of both major parties. Additionally, when major-party candidates win because of the spoiler effect, it undermines their claim of a mandate to lead.
RCV solves the spoiler problem: Voters who pick a third-party or independent candidate can have their ballot count for a major-party candidate as a backup choice. Voters need not worry about “wasting” their vote or feel forced to vote for the lesser of two evils. And, when a Republican or Democrat wins a competitive election, it is because they earned it, not because of the way votes happened to be split.
With RCV, major parties can even benefit from third-party competition. Major party nominees must expand their reach in order to win 2nd- and 3rd-choice rankings from third-party supporters. This helps put major parties more in touch with what voters are thinking and feeling. Indeed, research shows that in RCV jurisdictions, candidates are more likely to reach out to voters in person, and voters are more likely to be contacted by campaigns.
Conclusion
By creating incentives that free parties to engage more authentically with voters, RCV can promote a stronger and healthier party system. At each stage of the election, RCV bolsters the candidate with the broadest appeal, helping parties reach internal consensus and earn voter trust.
