Ranked choice voting allows voters to indicate their first, second, third, etc., choices on a ballot. If no candidate receives 50% of the first place votes, the votes for candidates receiving the least number of first place votes are examined, and their second place votes are allocated to the remaining candidates. The process continues until someone receives 50% of the total votes.
From a voter’s perspective, their votes can still count, even if their first choice is no longer in the running.
Should you find this slightly confusing, as many people do, Google can be your friend and teacher. Good non-partisan explanations are here and here. You can also go directly to the Better Ballot Iowa website here, which has a lot of information, including a way for you to sign up to help them bring RCV to Iowa.
The simple argument for RCV is it creates a better democracy, because winners have the most overall support in an election. The argument against it barely exists, claiming that voters don’t want change and don’t want to learn how to vote in an RCV election, a criticism I find unpersuasive.
I support ranked choice voting. If you don’t, could you do me a favor and write me a message explaining why not? Perhaps I’m missing something.
Perhaps party based voting. If Republicans have 725,000 voters and Democrats have 700,000, then the Republicans would win, unless the Green Party with it’s 15,000 voters and the Libertarians with 20,000 made the Democrats promise to vote on X, Y and Z issues. If so, they would through in with the Democrats to get them elected. It would give smaller parties a voice on certain issues.