Looking at the set of candidates, plurality voting will benefit Mamdani - Cuomo, Adams, and the Republican will split the rightwing vote. That outcome might convince some rightwingers that RCV isn't such a bad idea.
Great article. Could you clarify this data point: "76% say they want to keep or expand RCV to other elections, with 42% wanting to expand it to general elections and 34% wanting to keep it for primaries. Only 17% say RCV should not be used for municipal elections." It looks like the 76% is the combination of the 42% and 34%-- but do only 34% of voters think that NY should keep RCV for primaries? That seems low. Thanks!
So those saying "For more" means IN ADDITION TO the primary. So the number that want to keep using it in the primary is 76%. But you're right, that could be more clear.
RCV takes no account of relative support for different candidates. I may like my second choice almost as much as the first, or not like that second choice at all. Both possibilities lead to the same expressed vote. So RCV does not provide a good measure of opinion. Also hugely complex in a country where accusations of vote-rigging are already common. And RCV takes attention away from proportional representation, a much more important idea.
RCV works. RCV is growing fast in the US. It’s so much better than first-past-the-post. It creates a stepping stone to proportional representation. Let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and we’ll be stuck with yuck.
Edward I don't agree, either on a theoretical basis, where you seem to be most comfortable making your argument, or on a reality basis. In reality, the number of women-of-color elected to the New York city council has increased from only a handful to 26 out of 51 seats, resulting in a majority women-of-color council. And the number of women overall has reached 31 out of 51 (61%) of council seats. The city council for America’s largest city is one of the most racial and gender diverse in the country. That's not something to dismiss so casually. And other cities have seen similar results, such as Minneapolis, St Paul, San Francisco and more. I agree PR is the gold standard, and that's what we are focused on, but along the way it's nice to have validation about the merits of RCV, as NYC demonstrates so nicely. RCV does not take attention away from PR in my view, it is an important step along the way.
Looking at the set of candidates, plurality voting will benefit Mamdani - Cuomo, Adams, and the Republican will split the rightwing vote. That outcome might convince some rightwingers that RCV isn't such a bad idea.
It is good to see growing use of ranked choice voting in the US - writing from a country where it has been standard since the 1920s.
The idea that it is difficult is one to squash.
Great article. Could you clarify this data point: "76% say they want to keep or expand RCV to other elections, with 42% wanting to expand it to general elections and 34% wanting to keep it for primaries. Only 17% say RCV should not be used for municipal elections." It looks like the 76% is the combination of the 42% and 34%-- but do only 34% of voters think that NY should keep RCV for primaries? That seems low. Thanks!
Hi Karen, yes, the 42% who want to expand want to keep it for primaries as well:
https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=edce291d-d3e8-4bb9-94f2-1c6b5e94975e
Hi Karen, if you look at Question 21 in the survey at https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=edce291d-d3e8-4bb9-94f2-1c6b5e94975e you will see that the framing of the question is as follows:
"Just Primary Elections" = 34%
"For More, Including General" = 42%
So those saying "For more" means IN ADDITION TO the primary. So the number that want to keep using it in the primary is 76%. But you're right, that could be more clear.
RCV takes no account of relative support for different candidates. I may like my second choice almost as much as the first, or not like that second choice at all. Both possibilities lead to the same expressed vote. So RCV does not provide a good measure of opinion. Also hugely complex in a country where accusations of vote-rigging are already common. And RCV takes attention away from proportional representation, a much more important idea.
RCV works. RCV is growing fast in the US. It’s so much better than first-past-the-post. It creates a stepping stone to proportional representation. Let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and we’ll be stuck with yuck.
Edward I don't agree, either on a theoretical basis, where you seem to be most comfortable making your argument, or on a reality basis. In reality, the number of women-of-color elected to the New York city council has increased from only a handful to 26 out of 51 seats, resulting in a majority women-of-color council. And the number of women overall has reached 31 out of 51 (61%) of council seats. The city council for America’s largest city is one of the most racial and gender diverse in the country. That's not something to dismiss so casually. And other cities have seen similar results, such as Minneapolis, St Paul, San Francisco and more. I agree PR is the gold standard, and that's what we are focused on, but along the way it's nice to have validation about the merits of RCV, as NYC demonstrates so nicely. RCV does not take attention away from PR in my view, it is an important step along the way.