Democratic activists are looking to overhaul the party’s presidential primary process with ranked-choice voting.
Proponents of the idea have privately met with Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin and other leading party officials who want to see ranked-choice voting in action for 2028. Those behind the push include Representative Jamie Raskin, the nonprofit Fairvote Action, and Joe Biden pollster Celinda Lake.
Axios reports that ranked-choice supporters told a DNC breakfast meeting in D.C. that they believe it would unify and strengthen the party, prevent votes from being “wasted” after candidates withdraw, and encourage candidates to build coalitions. The publication quotes DNC members as being divided on the issue, with some being open and others thinking that it is best left to state parties.
Raskin told Axios that ranked-choice voting “favors positive politics rather than negative politics, and that’s a great thing for the Democratic Party primaries.”
“Oftentimes there’s a sense of acrimony and bitterness that can last decades. Think about the race between Hillary and Bernie Sanders,” Raskin added.
The change would only happen by getting past the DNC’s rules and bylaws committee, then the majority of the committee’s 450 members, and then state Democratic parties. Some states would also have to change their election laws. Some localities already use it for local and state elections, including Alaska, Maine, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and most famously, New York City, where Zohran Mamdani’s upstart campaign used ranked-choice voting to triumph in the Democratic mayoral primary.
This is exactly the problem. We need current politicians to pass RCV to fix the current broken system. But they don’t see the current system as broken, because the current system is what got them elected, so it must work, right? Also, they may recognized that, in a system where voters have a real choice and aren’t forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, they might have a harder time getting elected (or maybe don’t even stand a chance), so… “that can’t be good.”
In our state, we’ve been getting RCV pushed through at city and county levels. It’s a hill climbing exercise. With every small and local hill we climb it helps us get to a bigger one next.
It completely sucks how long it takes, but that’s how big changes can happen… Eventually.
Bruh, it’s been like less than a primary since New Hampshire had their primary tossed out by the DNC…
I don’t think he will, but the DNC chair could 100% make the unilateral decision that unless a state did RCV for the presidential primary, their votes don’t count.
It’s just a wild take to pretend that’s not an option after neoliberals used it against the voters less than 2 years ago.