Goring BOTH Parties’ Oxes:  Why 2016 May Be the Year Americans Use “Ranked Choice Voting”** to Elect the President

There were no computers (and ranked choice voting) when Woodrow Wilson was elected in 1912, but if there had been, runner-up Teddy Roosevelt would likely have been chosen President instead.

2016After all, a majority of voters wanted a Republican (incumbent President Howard Taft, also a Republican, finished third; Democrat Woodrow Wilson, the winner, only got 42%).

Fast forward nearly a century to 2000.

After Al Gore and George Bush finished in a dead heat, had there been ranked choice voting, most of Ralph Nader’s 4% would have shifted to Gore, making him President.

Instead, Nader was a spoiler, and the winner of Florida’s electoral votes — and therefore the election — was decided by the Supreme Court.

One could even argue that ranked choice voting would have altered the 1992 election.

Then, of course, Bill Clinton defeated George Bush by 42% to 37%, with Ross Perot garnering 18% and a smattering of candidates accounting for the rest.

But, if a majority of Ross Perot’s voters preferred Bush to Clinton — which certainly seems likely — Bush would instead have been reelected (technically, Perot voters would have had to prefer Bush to Clinton by 65% – 35% to overcome Bush’s 5% shortfall).

Clinton vs. Sanders vs. Bush(?) vs. Trump

As the 2016 election approaches, what’s significant — besides the fractured Republican field and Hillary Clinton’s primacy on the Democratic side — is the presence of viable “spoilers” on both sides of the race.

For the Democrats, it’s Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders; for Republicans, it’s blowhard Donald Trump.

While neither looks poised to capture their respective party’s nomination, one or both could easily mount a third-party candidacy which siphons off votes from the standard-bearer.

Democrats and Republicans who want to avoid that outcome would be wise to enact instant runoff voting now, assuring that any votes attracted by a “fringe” candidate running on the party nominee’s flank are ultimately captured by the nominee (vs. throwing the election to the other side).

**In ranked choice voting — also known as “instant run-off voting” — voters rank-order their preferences.

So, in 1912, Republicans likely would have cast their ballots either “1. Roosevelt/2. Taft,” or “1. Taft/2. Roosevelt” (there’s no requirement that voters specify a third choice).

When no candidate achieved 50%, the last place candidate is dropped from the race, and their votes shifted according to the voters’ second choice.

In 2000, ranked choice voting would likely have tilted the election the other way, i.e., from the Republicans to the Democrats.

See also, “Matthew McConaughey for President?!?  (Guess Who’s Using ‘Ranked Choice Voting’)”; and “When Being Close Counts:  Horse Shoes . . . Hand Grenades . . . Ranked Choice Voting??”

About the author

Ross Kaplan has 19+ years experience selling real estate all over the Twin Cities. He is also a 12-time consecutive "Super Real Estate Agent," as determined by Mpls. - St. Paul Magazine and Twin Cities Business Magazine. Prior to becoming a Realtor, Ross was an attorney (corporate law), CPA, and entrepreneur. He holds an economics degree from Stanford.

Leave a Reply