Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Make safe states matter

People voting
Paul J. Richards/Getty Images

Richie is co-founder and senior advisor of FairVote.

It’s time for “safe state” voters to be more than nervous spectators and symbolic participants in presidential elections.

The latest poll averages confirm that the 2024 presidential election will again hinge on seven swing states. Just as in 2020, expect more than 95 percent of major party candidate campaign spending and events to focus on these states. Volunteers will travel there, rather than engage with their neighbors in states that will easily go to Donald Trump or Kamala Harris. The decisions of a few thousand swing state voters will dwarf the importance of those of tens of millions of safe-state Americans.

But our swing-state myopia creates an opportunity. Deprived of the responsibility to influence which candidate will win, safe state voters can embrace the freedom to vote exactly the way they want, including for third-party and independent candidates.


Many voters worry about “wasting their vote” on candidates who can’t win. But safe-state voters are free to vote their conscience. In 2020, 36 states were won by at least 10 percentage points. Those states are a lock for Donald Trump or Kamala Harris even if millions of voters abandon them for minor parties.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently embraced America’s swing-state division. He suspended his independent candidacy only in the swing states to avoid being a spoiler. yet will offer voters a choice elsewhere. If you like Libertarian Chase Oliver, the Greens’ Jill Stein, or independent Cornel West and live in a safe state, give them your vote. Indeed, if they joined RFK in pulling out of swing states, they might earn even more votes because voters will know they’re not “spoilers.”

I certainly don’t suggest safe-state voters skip voting nor ignore down-ballot races — our votes are our voice wherever they’re cast. I’m not suggesting that either Harris or Trump aren’t the first choice of most Americans, nor that swing state voters can ignore the pragmatic reality that their states will decide the White House. But for voters who seek dramatic change, you have freedom in the safe states — and should use it.

Long-term, states can extend this voter freedom by adopting the ranked-choice voting system used by voters in Alaska and Maine and on the ballot in four states this November. With ranked-choice voting, you can support your favorite as your first choice. If that candidate doesn't have a chance to win and there's no majority winner, your ballot counts for your next choice among the strongest candidates in what amounts to an instant runoff. It ends “spoilers” and upholds majority rule.

Making us all swing-state voters demands an even bolder approach. It starts by recognizing its root cause. In 1960, 1976 and 1992, nearly two-thirds of states were battlegrounds — and they regularly shifted between elections. Now our system is far more rigid.

Our Constitution’s framers would be appalled at how our calcified partisan division marginalizes most Americans. Brought to life today, they would zero in on how state laws governing allocation of electoral votes make it politically useless to campaign where it isn’t close.

Those laws aren’t in the Constitution, and more states should join those that have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. With a few more adoptions — Maine being the latest to act this year — we can leverage the Electoral College to ensure that the White House always goes to the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Every vote would be equally meaningful in every election, and the candidates with the most votes would always win.

Looking to 2028, let’s help enough states enact the national popular vote plan to make all of us swing-state voters. Let’s help more states enact ranked-choice voting so we’re free to vote as we wish. But voters in safe states can matter this year: Just vote your heart.

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less