What is Ranked Choice Voting? 

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is a simple change that gives voters more voice and more choice in our elections and democracy. It is a popular, commonsense reform that ensures elected officials earn the broadest support possible in a single cost-saving election and allows for more candidates to run for office, giving voters more choice and more power at the ballot box.  

How does Ranked Choice Voting work?

With Ranked Choice Voting, voters cast a single ballot, ranking the candidates in their order of preference (first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on). Ballots are counted in rounds. If a candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, that candidate wins. If no candidate has a majority of first choices then the last-place candidate is eliminated and those ballots are reassigned to the second choices on those ballots. This process continues until one candidate reaches a majority and wins. It works like a traditional two-round election, but occurs in a single, less expensive, higher turnout election. See details here.

Why should Minnetonka adopt Ranked Choice Voting?

Ranked Choice Voting is a better way to vote because it promotes elections that are:

  • more efficient

  • more representative 

  • more participatory, inclusive and diverse

  • more civil

RCV is more efficient and saves taxpayer dollars because it eliminates the costly low-turnout primary and combines the primary and general elections into one election in November when turnout is much higher and representative of our residents.

Minnetonka currently runs two elections for city council and mayor: a primary in August which narrows the field of candidates down to two, and a general election between those two candidates in November. Local primary elections have very low voter turnout, about 4%, and that tiny slice of the electorate currently decides who advances to the general election ballot, preventing the larger voter pool in November from weighing in on all the candidates. 

This two-step process is costly to taxpayers and candidates, and time-consuming for staff, candidates, election judges, and voters. Further, very little media is focused on primaries, and candidates typically campaign only to the sliver of voters who attend them. Very few voters are aware of primaries and few show up. In city council elections, the last four August primary elections have averaged just 4% turnout, with general elections around 15%. Both seem pathetically low in a city that routinely attracts 85% of voters for national elections.  

With RCV, there is just one election in November. This saves time and money for the city, candidates and voters, and is easier and more convenient for voters to turn out just once. 

RCV is more representative because it gives voters more choice at the ballot box, and more people participate in the entire process and are able to vote on all the candidates at once. We wouldn’t have a small fraction of voters prematurely winnow the field of candidates in a low-turnout, early August primary. 

RCV empowers all voters to weigh in on the full slate of candidates, in a single decisive election in November when turnout is higher and more representative of the community. 

Increasing effective voter participation in this way is especially key for communities of color who are underrepresented in primaries. With RCV, a greater number of voters that are more broadly representative of the community are choosing our local officials.

RCV is more participatory, inclusive and diverse. Under our current system, many aspiring candidates are discouraged from running because it is expensive to run both a primary and general election campaign or they worry that the primary electorate, which skews older, less diverse, and more affluent, could be less receptive to their candidacy.

RCV levels the playing field for candidates. All candidates are on the ballot in November, giving new candidates more time to campaign and allowing a broader, more diverse electorate the chance to weigh in. Voters can express their true preference knowing that their second choice will count if their first choice doesn’t continue in the runoff. This encourages more competitive elections, since RCV allows more candidates to run without fear of being a “wasted vote.”  

RCV also encourages candidates to talk to all voters and seek support beyond their own base, resulting in office-holders who more fully represent the views and desires of the broadest swath of voters possible. See outcomes in Minneapolis, St. Paul and St. Louis Park since 2009. Further, a 2016 study of RCV in California shows how RCV results in greater representation by women and people of color. Election experts, polling data and academic literature refute the idea that RCV harms low income voters or communities of color.

RCV encourages civility and discourages negative campaigning: While it’s often said that Minnetonka hasn’t had negative or partisan campaigns, that doesn’t mean it never will. Many other cities are experiencing an increase in the partisanship of their elections, and it would be unwise to pretend it can’t happen here. RCV is proven to diminish the effectiveness of negative campaigning, where candidates try to convince voters that their opponent is terrible, so voters will cast ballots against the candidates they don’t like, instead of for the candidates they do like, while the undecided voters stay home and don’t vote out of disgust for the negative system.

In contrast, RCV incentivises candidates to campaign positively on ideas and positions that matter to voters. Since candidates are motivated to secure second-choice votes from their opponent’s supporters, RCV: 

  • Rewards candidates who appeal to a broad base of voters

  • Reduces the incentive for candidates to attack their opponents and promotes more civil, issue-oriented campaigns

  • Fosters coalition-building and compromise

Candidates behave differently knowing that being someone’s second choice is a tangible benefit. Once in office, a winner who has built a broad coalition of support can more easily reach beyond their base to forge compromises and problem-solve the critical issues facing their communities. In an era of hyper-partisanship and divisive politics, RCV is a key response to our nation’s growing polarization. See national study comparing voters’ perceptions of civility in cities using RCV and in those that do not.

Polling by Edison Research in Minneapolis, St. Paul and St. Louis Park following RCV elections shows that voters believe the campaigns have been very civil. In fact, 93 percent of Minneapolis voters and 90 percent of St. Paul voters in 2017 said that candidates spent little time criticizing each other -- and these were in cities with hotly contested mayoral races. In 2019 in St. Louis Park, 71 percent of voters said the same. See RCV By The Numbers and video testimony from voters here. 

How did Ranked Choice Voting get started in Minnesota and in Minnetonka? 

In 2004, the League of Women Voters Minnesota conducted an exhaustive, two-year study of voting systems and reached a consensus that endorsed Ranked Choice Voting as an option for local and state elections in Minnesota. See summary position on LWV-MN website here. In 2006, FairVote Minnesota, with the support of the League of Women Voters Minneapolis and former Minneapolis Mayor Don Frazer, led a grassroots campaign to adopt RCV in Minneapolis that was approved by a 2-to-1 margin by voters in 2006. St. Paul voters adopted Ranked Choice Voting in 2009 following the Minnesota Supreme Court ruling that RCV is constitutional.

In Minnetonka, a group of resident volunteers began learning about RCV and started to advocate with city council members in 2018. They reached out to Fairvote Minnesota for technical assistance (city charters and processes are complicated!) and to connect with other RCV supporters in their community (there were already several hundred). Two years and thousands of volunteer hours later, there is a true grassroots movement to improve our local elections process.

What has been the experience of Minnesota cities that use Ranked Choice Voting?

More than 545,000 Ranked Choice Voting ballots have been cast in Minnesota since 2009 when Minneapolis began using RCV. It has also been used in St. Paul since 2011 and in St. Louis Park since 2019. By all measures, RCV has been a resounding success in all three cities. Voter participation has increased, more candidates are offering voters more and diverse choices, and voters overwhelmingly say that RCV is easy to use and that they like it better than the old system. See more information regarding the results, turnout, voter opinions, and impact of RCV elections in Minnesota cities here.

Where is Ranked Choice Voting used?

Ranked Choice Voting has been used in major democracies around the world in countries like Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Australia, and New Zealand. In the U.S., it is used in several southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina) for military and overseas voters, and in nearly 20 cities in states across the country from California to New Mexico to Utah to Colorado to Minnesota to Maine. It is slated for use in several other local jurisdictions, including New York City beginning in 2021.

Here in Minnesota, RCV is used in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and St. Louis Park, and is being considered in a growing number of other cities, including Bloomington, Minnetonka, Red Wing and Rochester.  

Maine became the first state to use RCV in 2018 and will be using it for presidential elections starting in 2020. Five states successfully used RCV in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.

See full list of places that use RCV here. 

Does Ranked Choice Voting lead to higher voter engagement and turnout? 

Ranked Choice Voting automatically increases voter participation by eliminating the low-turnout primary and allowing voters to consider the full slate of candidates in the general election when turnout is higher and more diverse. In other words, even if general election turnout stays the same, those same voters (75% of whom don’t vote in the primary) will have more fully participated in the elections process. Having one decisive election in November encourages more candidates to engage with more voters over a longer period of time, and allows more people to fully participate in the entire election process. Plus, voters have to show up at the polls only once, which is easier and less expensive for everyone.  

Turnout in any election is determined by a variety of factors, but most importantly by the competitiveness of a race, media attention and candidate get-out-the-vote efforts. The Minnesota experience demonstrates that RCV fosters more competitive races and has helped to boost turnout. Last year, when St. Louis Park first used RCV, voter turnout increased by nearly 50% in the November general election, from 4,436 to 6,619 voters citywide, over 2015, the last similar election with the Mayor and both at-large council seats on the ballot. In 2017, turnout in Minneapolis was 43%, the highest in 20 years and a more than 32% increase over the relatively high turnout in 2013. A similar trend was seen in St. Paul and in other cities across the country with the implementation of RCV.

One reason more residents are voting is an increase of candidates and competitive races that create awareness of the election within the community. Conversely, without a competitive election, there is no “choice” for the voters, so they simply don’t vote. Potential candidates will be more likely to run when they don’t face the 2-step primary and general election process, and they know they’ll have more time to campaign for an election day with the greatest turnout. More candidates leads to greater competition, which leads to more active campaigning and election awareness, which leads to greater voter turnout, and more engaged communities.

Is Ranked Choice Voting confusing for voters?

This is by far the most frequently asked question and the answer is, no, based on extensive polling of voters who have actually used Ranked Choice Voting. In elections with three or more candidates, voters have the option to simply rank their choices instead of voting for just one candidate. RCV makes voting simpler by asking voters to come out once and eliminating the need to be “strategic” with their vote. Just because it’s a change on the ballot doesn’t mean it’s difficult for voters to use. In fact, the valid ballot rate in the most recent Minneapolis election in 2017 was 99.96 percent, demonstrating high levels of voter confidence and proficiency in ranking their ballots.

Evidence has shown time and time again that voters find RCV simple to use, and they like the greater choice and freedom of expression that they are given. Over 100 million people use RCV across our country and around the world. In the first highly competitive RCV mayoral race in Minneapolis in 2013, an astonishing 88 percent of voters ranked their ballots. Last year in St. Louis Park, where Edison Research polled voters on election day, 92% of polled voters said they found RCV simple to use, including 93 percent of people of color and 90 percent of those aged 55 and older. These results are remarkably consistent with previous RCV election polls in Minneapolis and St. Paul across different levels of income, age and education. Because other cities have already adopted RCV, it will be easier for Minnetonka to re-apply the process and implement it efficiently and effectively.

Is Ranked Choice Voting constitutional?

Yes. In 2009, the Minnesota State Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Ranked Choice Voting is fully constitutional: “Every voter has the same opportunity to rank candidates when she casts her ballot, and in each round every voter's vote carries the same value.” Minnesota Voters Alliance v. FairVote Minnesota, June 11, 2009. Federal courts have also ruled that RCV meets all tests under the U.S. Constitution.

Does Ranked Choice Voting allow some voters to vote more than once?

No. With Ranked Choice Voting, you have the option to rank your choices, but your vote only counts for one candidate in the final round. The same is true for all voters. As the Minnesota Supreme Court case made clear: Every voter gets an equal vote. In each round of counting, your ballot counts as one vote for your highest-ranked candidate still in the running. If your candidate is still viable, your vote will count for your favorite candidate in the runoff round. If your candidate has been eliminated – just as in a traditional runoff election – you need to settle for one of the remaining candidates. Your vote automatically counts for whichever continuing candidate you prefer. 

Under our current primary-general election system, a voter may vote for a candidate in the primary and then vote for a different candidate in the general election, if their preferred candidate loses the primary. Or they may vote for the same candidate in the general election. RCV is like a primary and general election on a single voting day. If a voter’s candidate is eliminated, and no other candidate has a majority of support, that voter’s next-ranked vote can be reallocated toward another choice.

What is the cost of implementing Ranked Choice Voting?

The cost of implementing Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is different in each city, depending on the voting equipment and outreach efforts they have in place when making the switch and whether or not the elections are held in odd or even years.

Minneapolis was the first city in Minnesota to adopt Ranked Choice Voting over a decade ago. Their pioneering work on ballot design, voting machine compatibility, and voter education made it easy for cities to follow their example, and with only a fraction of the effort. 

Minnetonka is in a good position to implement RCV cost-effectively: 

  • Since Minnetonka municipal elections are held in odd years when we don’t have federal or state elections, RCV will eliminate the cost of the primary altogether, saving the city that $50,000 expense.

  • Minnetonka already uses the same tabulators to scan paper ballots as those used to scan the RCV paper ballots in Minneapolis and St. Louis Park.

  • Minneapolis and St. Louis Park have a blueprint for implementing RCV and tabulating the results that Minnetonka can use to avoid unnecessary startup costs.

  • Software certified to instantly tabulate results is expected as early as 2021, which will reduce the cost of ballot tabulation. 

  • While the city may provide voter education about the new process, this cost should not be significantly higher than what the city is already doing for voter education, such as printing sample ballots and posting information about the election and voting process on the city website and in communications to voters. Community organizations, including FairVote Minnesota and League of Women Voters, also provide grassroots voter outreach and education, reducing voter education costs.

Given that the blueprint and equipment for conducting RCV elections in Minnetonka is already in place elsewhere in Hennepin County, there should not be a significant cost to implement RCV. The elimination of the primary will result in cost savings to taxpayers.

Of note for community leaders who may still be concerned about voter confusion and wonder whether great expense is needed to explain to voters how to rank their choices: the State of Maine successfully implemented RCV for the first time in a statewide election with a high voter turnout and spent only $83,000 state-wide on implementation, or less than $0.08 per voter.

Does Ranked Choice Voting require a majority to win?

Yes. In a Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) election for a single race, it is always the case that the winner receives a majority of ballots cast (50%+1) in the final round. 

Is it common for candidates to ultimately win who finished in second-place in the first round?

No. To date, of the 24 Ranked Choice Voting elections in Minnesota in which winners were decided in a runoff (with second- or third-choice votes), the second-place finisher won in only two of those elections. 

This is similar to the second-place finisher in the current primary system winning the general election. It doesn’t happen often, but it can happen in highly competitive races. Twenty-four percent (25 of 102) of all races using RCV in Minnesota have been decided with second or third-choice votes, and that outcome is accomplished in a single cost-effective, high-turnout election. For the vast majority of elections that are decided without the need for more than one round of tabulation, no money is wasted on an unnecessary primary. 

What is the process for adopting Ranked Choice Voting in Minnetonka?

The adoption of Ranked Choice Voting for mayoral and city council elections would require amending the city charter, which can be done by ordinance or by referendum.

If by ordinance, the vote would require a unanimous consensus by the city council. This is the approach St. Louis Park took.

Alternatively, a question could be placed on the ballot by a majority vote of the city council or charter commission or by voter petition with 1,600 signatures of Minnetonka residents. If the question is initiated by the council, it must be reviewed by the charter commission. If it is initiated by a citizen petition, it does not require approval by the council or charter commission. Regardless of how it appears on the ballot, the city council must approve the language of the ballot question. If 51 percent or more of those who vote on the ballot question support it, RCV would be adopted for mayoral and city council elections.

While school board elections are held at the same time as municipal elections, RCV is not currently available for school board as those elections are governed by state law, not city charter. 

What if I unknowingly make a mistake on my ballot? Will my vote be counted? 

First of all, just like now, if you make a mistake on your Ranked Choice Voting ballot that would disqualify your ballot (e.g., ranking two different candidates as your favorite), the tabulator would reject your ballot and you would have an opportunity to correct it. However, if you choose not to correct it, then just like now, your vote might not count depending on the error that you made. In other words, whether using RCV or the current system, mistakes are handled the same way.

Could it hurt my preferred candidate’s chances of winning if I rank other candidates 2nd and 3rd? 

No. Your vote counts for your second choice only if your first choice is eliminated. Your vote only counts for your third choice only if your first and second choices are eliminated.

Do voters have to rank all the candidates, even candidates they don't like?

No. You can rank as many, or as few, candidates as you like, up to the limit of choices permitted by the final rules of the city election. In most cases, it’s up to 3 choices. The value of ranking is to ensure your ballot continues to count if your first choice is eliminated. 

Does Ranked Choice Voting help mitigate the influence of money in campaigns?

We have observed that Ranked Choice Voting has helped reduce the influence of money in local campaigns. RCV levels the playing field and gives a fighting chance to candidates who have good ideas, but not big bank accounts. In the 2013 Minneapolis mayoral race, the winning candidate was outspent 3-to-1 by her leading opponent. Similar disparities in campaign spending by candidates and their PACs have been seen in other races elsewhere in the United States. Why? Because most of the big money raised directly by campaigns, PACs, or Independent Expenditures is used for negative TV ads or mailings. Attack ads and messaging are not only unhelpful in an RCV campaign, but can actually backfire. This was seen in the Ward 2 council race in St. Paul in 2015 and St. Paul mayoral race in 2017, in which Independent Expenditure organizations sent negative mailers against the winning candidate. Negative campaigning may work under the traditional system, but is not a successful strategy under RCV.

Who supports Ranked Choice Voting?

In a recent city-sponsored survey of Minnetonka residents, 66% favored using RCV for our city council elections, 22% were against it, and 12% were unsure. The research was part of an annual survey by a professional research firm hired by the city of Minnetonka, using methodology that yields statistically significant results. They interview over 400 residents, and are very deliberate about ensuring a representative sample of our community. It covers a wide array of topics and is a core resource for the city and city council to make major decisions for many years.

Voters support Ranked Choice Voting, winning on the ballot in most of the nearly 20 cities using it. In Minneapolis, it passed 2:1 on the ballot, and in St. Paul by 52 percent of the voters. St. Louis Park city council adopted RCV by unanimous vote following a popular grassroots effort advocating for the change. Most recently, RCV was adopted by 78 percent of voters in New York City. 

RCV is also supported by a wide range of Minnesota political, business, community, and philanthropic leaders, media publications and civic organizations, including the League of Women Voters Minnesota and the DFL, Independent, Green, and Libertarian parties. 

The Star Tribune, Sun Sailor and Current and ECM papers, and Rochester Post Bulletin have editorialized in favor of RCV, as have a number of papers across the country, including the New York Times and Washington Post. 

Well-known political leaders like former Senator Dave Durenberger, former Congressman Tim Penny and current Congressman Dean Phillips are strong RCV champions. Rep. Phillips recently introduced the Voters Choice Act to provide support to cities and states transitioning to RCV. 

Minnetonka Representative Patty Acomb and Senator Steve Cwodzinski are co-sponsors of the Local Options Bill that would make it easier for cities like Minnetonka to adopt Ranked Choice Voting. 

In 2019, former Bloomington mayor Gene Winstead and two dozen business and health care leaders, including Marilyn Carlson Nelson, Jonathan Weinhagen, Bill and Penny George, Marc Gorelick, Penny Wheeler, Kelly Doran, Peter Hutchinson and Karla Ekdahl, Ken Powell and Wendy Bennett, among others signed a letter of support for the bi-partisan RCV Local Options Bill introduced by Bloomington Steve Elkins in the House and Scott Jensen in the Senate.

A growing number of national political scientists and business professors are championing RCV as a top reform to address our nation's growing polarization, including Stanford Professor Larry Diamond, award-winning author Lee Drutman, and Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter, to name a few. 

Who opposes Ranked Choice Voting? 

The main group opposed to Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in Minnesota is the Minnesota Voters Alliance, which challenged RCV with a lawsuit in 2009 and lost. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled unanimously that RCV is constitutional. It is the same group that led the unsuccessful pro-Voter ID push in Minnesota in 2011 and recently lost its case before the Minnesota Supreme Court to require public disclosure of voter information.  

Senator Kiffmeyer, whose Elections Committee is leading an effort to preempt RCV in Minnesota, has served on their board. Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Bakk is also a co-sponsor of the RCV pre-emption bill. 

What are some common myths about Ranked Choice Voting?

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting disenfranchises voters. 

No, it doesn’t. To the contrary, evidence shows that Ranked Choice Voting increases turnout and enfranchises more voters.

Opponents cite the case of a voter who chooses to rank fewer candidates than are available, ranking one or two candidates, for example, when they could rank two or three, and the candidate they rank is eliminated because they received the lowest number of votes. In this case, a voter is choosing to cast fewer preferences than are allowed in an election. This scenario is no different from our current system when someone votes in the primary for a candidate who doesn’t make it to the general election. That voter is still able to vote for a remaining candidate in the general election. If they decide they don't like the remaining candidates, it's their choice to not vote in the general election. No voter is disenfranchised; to the contrary, the voter is given more power to rank candidates in order of their preference. If they choose to rank only some, that is their choice. Indeed, if Minnetonka adopted RCV, there would be one election in November, increasing the number of voters having a say in our local elections - the opposite of disenfranchising voters.

As we describe above, an “exhausted” ballot does not equal a disenfranchised voter. It simply means that a voter didn’t have a preference for any more candidates on the ballot after selecting their first or second preferences.

Another way to think about it: Currently, 4% of voters participate in the Minnetonka city council primary, and 15% in the general election. This means that just 25% of the city council general election voters participated in the primary, and were able to indicate more than one preference. But in nearly every Ranked Choice Voting election, over 75% of voters indicated more than one preference. This shows, once again, how our current voting system is inferior.

RCV would eliminate our low-turnout primary and bring together the most choices and most voters in one single, decisive, cost-efficient election in November. It rewards candidates who can reach beyond their base to build broad coalitions of voters and listen to all voices in their community.  

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting disadvantages communities of color and less affluent voters. 

No, it does just the opposite. Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) has been shown to enfranchise communities of color by eliminating low-turnout primary elections which are disproportionately attended by older, less diverse, and more affluent voters than the general election. For example, in 2005 (before RCV was enacted), general election turnout in Minneapolis was nearly three times greater than primary turnout (8 percent compared to 21 percent) in Ward 5 which is predominately people of color compared to two times greater for the city overall (15 percent to 30 percent). RCV mitigates this inequity by holding one election in November, when turnout is higher and more diverse. In San Francisco, effective voter participation increased as high as 300 percent in traditionally low-turnout precincts.

As discussed above, RCV helps to increase and diversify the voters participating as well as the candidates running. Over time, RCV has proven to yield more elected officials from historically underrepresented communities. RCV allows candidates to run without fear of being eliminated in a low-turnout primary, as well as the opportunity to garner votes from voters who are no longer afraid of splitting or wasting their vote on a lesser-known candidate.

Hear voices from from communities of color, both candidates and voters, on how RCV helps expand electoral power in their communities in post-election video testimony here.

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting favors one party over another.

Ranked Choice Voting doesn’t favor any political party; it simply ensures that outcomes reflect the will of the majority of voters. Fundamentally, RCV is about increasing the range of viable choices for voters by eliminating the fear of spoiler candidates, regardless of party affiliation. That’s just good, smart democracy. Furthermore, political leaders from all parties have endorsed RCV. Utah, a Republican state, passed RCV legislation in 2018 enabling cities to use RCV, and Maine, a state known for its large number of independent voters, adopted and started using RCV that same year. 

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting means too many candidates will run.

No, only in very rare cases. This issue is raised because of the large number of candidates on the 2013 ballot for Minneapolis mayor which was a result of the first competitive open mayoral race in 12 years coupled with no party endorsements and a very low filing fee for a city as large as Minneapolis. The city has since implemented a requirement to collect a minimum number of signatures or pay a higher filing fee, similar to St. Paul, so voters likely won’t see such a long ballot again. In 2017, the number of candidates was half that in 2013 and similar to a typical competitive primary for mayor in Minneapolis, the largest local election in Minnesota. This is not the case in any other city in Minnesota. In mayoral and council races, the number of candidates running in an open or competitive race is typically between three and five.

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting favors incumbents or Ranked Choice Voting favors challengers.

We hear both arguments. The truth is Ranked Choice Voting does not favor incumbents or challengers. It favors candidates who make an effort to talk to more voters, actively reach out beyond their base for second- and third- choice support and, ultimately, who appeal to the broadest number of voters.

A research paper from Utah State University examining the 2013 Minneapolis RCV election found no evidence that RCV supports incumbent candidates. Three of the nine incumbents seeking reelection lost their races. Similarly, in the St. Louis Park at-large City Council race last year, the incumbent came in third. By eliminating the primary, RCV lowers barriers for entry and opens up the opportunity for new voices and candidates to enter the race and win. If the incumbent is strong, that candidate is unlikely to garner a strong challenger - just like now. If the incumbent is not very strong, the race may draw challengers and one of them may win. These political dynamics are the same under any voting system.

Myth: Ranked Choice Voting results in winners who are everyone's second choice.

This is not possible. Candidates must have strong first-choice support to move on to the next round. If a candidate gets few first choices, that candidate will be eliminated and not be able to return even if he was the second choice on many voters’ ballots.

Myth: You can harm your candidate by ranking them first, or RCV can be manipulated.

Prepare to go down the rabbit hole! If a candidate had perfect information about how everyone would vote, AND was able to coordinate a precise number of their own supporters to vote for less popular candidates, it is theoretically possible they could eliminate a stronger opponent in the primary stage of our current voting system and in a RCV election. However, elections simply don’t work this way - candidates don’t know exactly what the vote totals will be and it would be dumb to tell your supporters to attempt this strategy. Also, this scenario is more likely in our current system, since there would be more opportunity to coordinate this scheme over 2 separate voting days than on a single ranked ballot. It’s mathematically possible, but impossible in the real world.

Some cities have rejected Ranked Choice Voting. Why should we adopt it?

While some jurisdictions may have repealed Ranked Choice Voting when anti-democratic forces were threatened by its success (among them Ann Arbor, Michigan, following the election of the city’s first African American mayor, and Burlington, Vermont, following the election of a Reform Party candidate), momentum is on the side of RCV because it is a people-powered reform and has proven to be so successful and popular with voters.

As described above, Minnesota’s two largest cities and suburban St. Louis Park have successfully used RCV, and polling shows that voters find it easy to use and prefer it over the old system. Moreover, RCV use across the country is expanding with several cities adopting this pro-voter system every year, and many states advancing ballot measures and legislation for use of RCV in state elections.