3 ms·
Sorry, I left a key part out- the issue is combining ranked choice voting AND a multiple party system. If you only had 2-3 parties, I agree with you. However I
by hash872 5y ago
Sorry, I left a key part out- the issue is combining ranked choice voting AND a multiple party system. If you only had 2-3 parties, I agree with you. However I think what the RCV people are hoping for is a multiparty system, yes? So once you get above 4 parties, the odds of multiple states all having picked a different candidate increases, so that no one gets a majority.
Extremely simplified example- the South all chooses the Republican candidate, the West Coast all chooses the Democratic candidate, the Midwest all chooses the Populist candidate, the Northeast mostly chooses the Whig candidate. Alaska chooses the Alaska Independence Party candidate. Vermont and New Mexico chooses the Green Party candidate. See the problem now?
- gizmo385 5y agoCouldn't states just develop complex rules for sending their delegations that knock losing candidates off the list and redistribute local votes based on national electoral gridlock? That sounds somewhat similar to the way the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is supposed to work.
- hash872 5y agoI guess in theory. You'd need a bunch of states to cooperate together (so both red & blue), plus Congress has to bless it. Contrary to what the popular vote people seem to believe, the Compact Clause (Article I, Section 10, Clause 3) of the Constitution states that "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State"