Casting a vote for a third-party candidate usually doesn’t affect the outcome of an election, but in a close race, a third party candidate can be a “spoiler,” depriving a more viable candidate of critical support and tipping the election to the candidate who is least favored by the voter. 

Most analysts agree that Ralph Nader siphoned off enough votes in Florida to hand the 2000 election to George W. Bush, even though the Democrat, Al Gore, was much more closely aligned with the values of Nader and his Green Party supporters. 

And in 2016, the Green Party likely deprived Hillary Clinton of the votes she needed to win in Michigan and Wisconsin. Donald Trump ended up carrying those states by razor-thin margins and just 47 percent of the vote.

This year the polls indicate that Trump is once again likely to lose the nationwide popular vote,­­­­­ but the Electoral College is a coin toss. Even a handful of votes cast for the Green Party in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan could put Trump back in the White House, which is certainly not the result that most Green Party voters are seeking.

While it’s too late to do anything about the “spoiler” problem this year, there is a simple solution that can eliminate it in future elections. It’s called Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Using RCV, a voter ranks all the candidates on the ballot according to their preference. For example, if a voter prefers the Green or Libertarian candidate, they can pick that candidate as their first choice and then select a Republican or Democrat as their second choice. 

When the votes are counted, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and the votes cast for that candidate are reallocated to the voter’s second choice. This process is repeated until one candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote.

Ranked-choice voting is not new. It’s been around for over one hundred years. It’s used in other countries and in scores of municipalities throughout the United States. Both Alaska and Maine already use RCV to elect members of Congress and in presidential elections.

RCV can be a boon for third parties because it gives voters the freedom to cast a ballot for their favorite candidate without worrying about the “spoiler” effect. With RCV, the true depth of support for policies and positions can be revealed, because voters are able to vote with their heart rather than for purely pragmatic reasons. 

And of course, increased support at the polls could lead to more serious consideration of the ideas and philosophies espoused by third parties.

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that there are forces opposed to RCV, apparently because it empowers the individual voter. Alabama, Mississippi and Kentucky are among several states that have outlawed ranked choice voting in all elections within their jurisdiction.

Bruce Ferguson
Callicoon Center, NY