Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Warren would best Biden in ranked-choice nominating contest, poll shows

Warren would best Biden in ranked-choice nominating contest, poll shows

A billboard in San Francisco in 2011 explained the ranked-voting process used to select city officials.

Flickr

If Democrats were given the opportunity to vote for more than one candidate among those seeking the presidential nomination, then Elizabeth Warren would win, according to a poll out Thursday by advocates of ranked-choice voting.

The unusual survey is sure to be cited not only by the Massachusetts senator – as evidence she enjoys more widespread enthusiasm than her rivals, and the potential to expand her base as the field shrinks -- but also by those who say democracy is better served by a voting system that rewards consensus candidates.


The FairVote sponsored poll of 1,002 likely Democratic primary voters has former Vice President Joe Biden as the top choice of 27 percent, the same as his average share in all the national polling done since Labor Day. The Massachusetts senator was at 24 percent when voters were asked to make a singular choice, a higher-than average showing for her.

But when these same voters used ranked-choice voting – under which they could vote for more than one candidate and put their selection in order of preference – Warren showed a greater depth of support than Biden.

Using such a system, Warren would end up besting Biden 53 percent to 47 percent.

"In contrast to how most single choice opinion polling is used, ranked-choice surveys allow a greater understanding of how voters are considering a field of options, what depth of support candidates have in rankings and how one candidate's fall over the course of the campaign could affect others' rise," said Rob Richie, the CEO of FairVote, which commissioned the survey.

Warren's victory under the ranked-choice system, according to the poll, would come mainly from being supported relatively strongly by those who would first choose Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont or Sen. Kamala Harris of California. Respondents who made those two their top picks favored Warren over Biden as their second choice by a wide margin.

Warren also had the highest favorability ranking of the 20 candidates polled, at 74 percent, followed by both Biden and Sanders at 69 percent. And in a head-to-head matchup, she outpolled Biden 49 percent to 43 percent.

The survey also found support for the ranked-choice voting approach. Almost all of those polled did choose more than one candidate when given the chance. More than two-thirds described the process of choosing more than one candidate as easy. And about two-thirds said they favored ranked-choice voting, compared to 13 percent who opposed it.

Respondents said that health care, climate change and gun violence were the top issues they wanted to see addressed in the upcoming debates among the Democratic candidates.

Critics of ranked-choice voting fear that it would confuse voters.

Democrats in several states -- including Hawaii, Alaska, Kansas and Wyoming -- are planning to use ranked-choice voting in their 2020 primaries, although the Democratic National Committee has yet to sign off on states' voting plans. Plans for the presidential debut of so-called RCV in the crucial first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses seem to have been scraped, however.


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less