RANKED CHOICE VOTING made sure that the REAL winner for Congress came out on top in Maine.

[LBM20]

Maine just made history by usuing Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for federal level general election races. RCV is simply an Instant Runoff Voting system, similar in nature to traditional runoff systems but just done through one efficient ballot eliminating the need to hold a much more costly second election weeks or months later.

In this system where there are more than two candidates, you simply rank them in order of preference. If someone gets a majority, it's over. If not, the instant runoff kicks in. The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the second choices of those who voted for that candidate are re-distributed to the remaining candidates. The votes are re-tabulated. If there is then a majority winner, it is over. If not, the process continues in this manner until there is a majority winner.

Jared Golden, our Dem candidate for US House of Reps, just won yesterday with this process because there were four candidates and the votes got split. So the instant runoff was used. He was about 2000 votes behind the R, Bruce Poliquin, after the first round of tabulation, but with the instant runoff emerged ahead by about 3000 votes. It was all very close, but he won because we now have this instant runoff system.

We fought HARD to get RCV through many obstacles and legal challenges and TWO successful referendums, but got it DONE, and most people are saying it is easy and they like it and in fact want to expand it.

RCV is used in other countries and a number of other places around this country at the local level.

If you have questions about it, please let me know. As said, Maine is the first state to use it for elections at such a high level.

[2naSalit]

1. I find that interesting.

I don't recall voting in a state that used that at all, but I could be mistaken. I just don't remember hearing about that sort of election process. It sounds interesting and might be a good idea in a number of ways.

[LBM20]

2. A number of cities such as San Francisco, Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Cambridge, MA, etc. use it.

[2naSalit]

3. That explains it...

never voted in any of those places. It sounds like a more practical way to elect the candidate with the most support.

[LBM20]

4. Maine is the first state to use RCV on a statewide basis. There are several other countries that do.

Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and some others use RCV. Before Maine, in the U.S. it has only been used at the local level.

In your state are there any forms of runoff voting, such as traditional runoffs with a second election between the top two vote getters?

[2naSalit]

5. I think so.

I have to check, we just had a couple close races this time around but not close enough for a runoff. I'm in Montana, our voting population is pretty small to begin with. I'll have to look into that though.

[LBM20]

6. Places like Helena and Bozeman should consider trying out RCV. We used if first locally in Portland.

Used it first in 2011 for mayor in Portland. They kept and have now used it twice and will again in 2019 for mayor as they elect their mayor every four years.

Worked well, and now extended to several statewide races. Was hard to do though. Had to win two referendums and overcome resistance. Now even many naysayers are happy with it.

[druidity33]

7. Working on it here in MA... K&R, nt.

[LBM20]

9. It works great and is better than traditional runoffs with more big money, attack ads, etc.

In many traditional runoffs there is more big money, more attack ads, etc. With RCV it is all done at the time of the first vote with a Ranked Choice ballot. Faster, more efficient, and no more big money attacks ads and all that in an entirely new runoff election weeks or months later. It works really well in Maine. Get er done in MA!

[Mustellus]

8. The Republicans spend a lot of money....

... supporting Rat F**k parties. They seem to have backed Nader. Jill Stein was at the same table with General Flynn and Putin in Moscow. If you can splinter the Democratic vote, a less popular (e.g. Republican) can win.

This would be the end of minor parties in close elections...

[LBM20]

10. Would certainly diminish their influence, yes. Vote splitting has killed us time and time again.

[JonLP24]

12. It would lesson the blame for third parties for sure

Historically though they played an important role bringing new issues to light and part of the National dialogue like women's right to vote.

[LBM20]

24. Yes, but we need real winners and not fake winners due to vote splitting.

[JonLP24]

26. I think third parties would like ranked choice voting as well

Maybe less of a "wasted vote" mindset.

[quakerboy]

15. How would it end them?

I would think it would bolster them, if anything.

[LBM20]

25. It stops the vote-splitting. That's the point.

[quakerboy]

27. It also frees people to vote for them

With a clear conscience, knowing that you can try voting green, or working family, or even socialist, without having thrown away your vote in a close race.

Id think that would greatly improve the number of votes third parties get

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

16. Also, this system would make it easier for independents to win

when they are truly the most well liked candidate. In this method, voters don't need to worry that voting for their favorite candidate could result in the most unfavorable candidate getting elected. The whole point is to take away the strategic voting aspect. I think a lot of people find it easier, less stressful.

[PAMod]

11. I would think this would foster a less negative campaign overall...

...but maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

Hopefully more places will try it.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

18. I think it will eventually once Republicans get it

Republicans seem to still be operating like it is the plurality method. They are hoping to somehow get ranked choice thrown out. Poliquin ran a nasty campaign and then he called himself the winner after the first round and he won't concede that Golden won. His strategy is to act like the new system is bogus and he was the one wronged. Ridiculous, but once this passes and if he doesn't get his way, people will stop trying that.

[NurseJackie]

13. Ranked Choice Voting certainly would help to mitigate damage done by spoiler candidates.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. It could almost make the concept of a "spoiler candidate" obsolete.

I strongly favor this system. It could save our ass someday if we ever get saddled with an election featuring a literally corrupt Democratic candidate, an extremist right wing Republican candidate, and "a good government" Independent. Democrats could cast their votes fairly confident that a right winger wouldn't ultimately win due to splits on our side.

[NurseJackie]

17. I've seen some of the confusing ballot styles, and the learning curve would be steep...

I've seen some of the confusing ballot styles, and the learning curve would be steep. Unless there was a major push to educate voters how it worked, and how to correctly fill out the ballot... there may be a lot of resistance (and errors.)

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. It would be worth investing in that voter education effort

Good marketing people know how to pull off that type of campaign if it has enough support and funding behind it.

Unfortunately that is a big if. I am curious to learn more about how this change is being managed in Maine, and the degree of difficulty and confusion that it presented to voters there.

[LBM20]

23. Almost ZERO confusion. This "confusion" argument is a load of PURE BULLSHIT.

It is an EASY ballot, and with some basic voter education through a video from the Sec. of State, written materials sent out by various organizations, and sample ballots sent out in the media, there were almost NO problems reported in two statewide elections and the same with using it in 2011 and 2015 in our largest city for mayor, Portland.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

20. It wasn't confusing at all

Just rank them in order you want by filling in by the dots. Most people can handle it. It's pretty intuitive.

[LBM20]

22. Not our experience in Maine at all. The ballot is EASY. Very few problems with "confusion."

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

21. Yes that is the whole point n/t

[brush]

28. Curious as to how the Dem won when he was 2000 votes behind...

before the re-distribution of votes.

Are the votes shared equally in the re-distribution? How is that decided?