Many people tout Ranked Choice Voting as a solution to the gridlock of the so-called two-party system. Others say it will be to confusing to voters. One thing I do know is that it requires charter and constitutional changes. Like many elections of candidates, charter changes will probably not be brought about by a majority of eligible voters.
We can put a better perspective on election results with a simple election administration change. Each precinct, county, and state should publish the totals of registered voters who did not vote and include it in a ranked report.
For example, assume a precinct with 1,000 registered voters of whom only 600 showed up. 290 voted for A, 250 voted for B, and 60 voted for C. A is declared the winner because A received the plurality of votes. And A's party will be dancing until midnight celebrating the victory.
But, let's consider the true count. 400 voters didn't care to show up at all. If the precinct had to include these un-cast votes in its report, we might see something like this:
400 (40%) no vote cast
290 (29%) Candidate A
250 (25%) Candidate B
60 ( 6%) Candidate C
Even if Candidate A had received 310 votes or a majority of the votes cast, the report would still show Candidate A coming in second to "no vote cast". Not exactly an overwhelming victory; Candidate A did not get a "mandate".
Actually, we don't even need an administrative change. If media started reporting results in this manner, it would have the same effect. Most large media organizations have access to this data.
If this idea really took hold, we might get one or more of the following. Candidates would work to increase turnout; candidates would work to widen their appeal; additional candidates may run because they would see the "popular" candidates as not so popular.
