[lann]

Or actually radical: switch from our terrible first-past-the-post voting system to - say - ranked choice (or one of many alternatives; they're almost all better than fptp) and then primaries won't be so important and parties won't have so much power over our kinda-democratic-but-actually-oligarchic political system.

[smegger001]

because we cant do that in the next 4 months as it would require a overwhelming enough demand from the electorate that a super majority of representatives in the house and senate along with the president would have to pass a constitutional amendment that is otherwise considered against their own interests, then it would need to be ratified by the states and pass through the inevitable challenges in the supreme court that seem dead set against anything resembleling democracy this year.

[Aloisius]

California state primaries are top-2, not FPTP turning the general election into essentially a run-off. Parties still dominate. Same with my city elections which use RCV.

I’m not sure why they would reduce party influence either. Features like being robust against spoilers would seem to most benefit major party candidates.

[aldonius]

By more-or-less eliminating spoiler effect RCV actually benefits major and minor party candidates (and of course, voters!).

For majors the benefit is clear: you don't get spoiled.

For minors, you don't have to overcome the barrier of being a spoiler if the race looks remotely close.

And of course voters are not disadvantaged just for having two acceptable choices rather than one.

[lann]

Top-2 is a primary system, not a voting system. When combined with (essentially a generalized version of) FPTP you get most of the same problems.

[Aloisius]

It's a two-round voting system. It is, by definition, not FPTP.

There only functional difference between it and say, the original French two-round system that Maurice Duverger (of Duverger's law) contrasted with FPTP is that someone who wins an outright majority in the first election (an open "primary" in California) is not immediately elected.

The fact the second round is FPTP doesn't change the overall voting system. With only two candidates for a single seat, most voting systems degenerate to FPTP, but none of the issues related to FPTP are present either (there are no clones, no strategic voting, etc.)

[tshaddox]

It would be kinda funny to keep the electoral college but change the ballots to ranked choice.

[LargeWu]

There's no reason this couldn't happen. States have great latitude to determine their own election laws, including how they allocate electoral votes or elect federal offices. Nebraska and Maine can split their electoral votes. Georgia requries 50% + 1 for US Senate and Governor instead of a plurality, and will have a runoff election if no candidate gets a majority in the general election. Ranked choice would just be another method. The problem is that the two ruling parties have very little incentive to introduce this.