Should the US Adopt Ranked-Choice Voting?
Alaska and Maine use ranked-choice voting for federal elections; New York City adopted it for local primaries. Proponents say it ends the spoiler effect. Critics say multi-round ballot counting confuses voters and can elect a candidate most voters ranked second. Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
Tuesday, July 21, 2026 · 7:00 PM EDT
What's at stake
RCV could end the "lesser of two evils" dynamic that defines American elections. Or it could produce winners most voters actively opposed, while making vote-counting so complex that confidence in results collapses.
The Matchup
The Positions
RCV lets voters express genuine preferences instead of strategically voting for the lesser evil. It produces winners with broader support and breaks the two-party duopoly.
- The spoiler effect — where a third-party candidate splits the vote with the ideologically closer major-party candidate and elects the one both disliked most — is a structural defect in plurality voting. Ralph Nader in 2000, Ross Perot in 1992, and dozens of state-level races show this. RCV eliminates it mathematically: your second choice activates only if your first is eliminated.
- Alaska adopted RCV in 2022 and elected Mary Peltola, ending 50 years of Republican dominance in its House seat. Post-election surveys showed voters understood the system and approval of the process was high. The claim that RCV confuses voters is not supported by the evidence from jurisdictions that have adopted it.
- RCV forces candidates to build broader coalitions — you need to be the second choice of your opponents' voters to survive. That structural incentive rewards candidates who run issue-focused, less negative campaigns. Studies of Australian elections (which have used RCV nationally since 1918) show lower negative campaigning rates than equivalent US races.
Debater: To be announced
RCV can elect candidates a majority of voters actively opposed, delays results for days or weeks, and burdens election administrators with a system that creates new forms of voter confusion.
- RCV violates majority rule: the Condorcet paradox shows that in certain vote distributions, it's possible to elect a candidate who would lose head-to-head against any individual opponent. "Exhausted ballots" — where a voter's rankings are all eliminated before the final round — mean not all voters participate equally in the final decision.
- New York City's 2021 mayoral primary under RCV saw weeks of counting, multiple erroneous results, and a final outcome that differed from initial results — creating widespread public confusion about who won. Election administrators in smaller counties lack the software and training to run RCV reliably; scaling it federally would require massive infrastructure investment.
- The spoiler effect is overblown: strong third-party candidates appear in only a fraction of elections, and the solution — ballot access reform, open primaries — can be achieved without the complexity of RCV. Approval voting achieves most of the anti-spoiler benefit with much simpler ballot mechanics and counting that can be done by hand.
Debater: To be announced
Join the debate
Make Your Case
Record a 60-second video on either side — or make it in writing. The strongest cases get featured before the live debate.
“The spoiler effect — where a third-party candidate splits the vote with the ideologically closer major-party candidate and elects the one both disliked most — is a structural defect in plurality voting. Ralph Nader in 2000, Ross Perot in 1992, and dozens of state-level races show this. RCV eliminates it mathematically: your second choice activates only if your first is eliminated.”
“Alaska adopted RCV in 2022 and elected Mary Peltola, ending 50 years of Republican dominance in its House seat. Post-election surveys showed voters understood the system and approval of the process was high. The claim that RCV confuses voters is not supported by the evidence from jurisdictions that have adopted it.”
“RCV violates majority rule: the Condorcet paradox shows that in certain vote distributions, it's possible to elect a candidate who would lose head-to-head against any individual opponent. "Exhausted ballots" — where a voter's rankings are all eliminated before the final round — mean not all voters participate equally in the final decision.”
“New York City's 2021 mayoral primary under RCV saw weeks of counting, multiple erroneous results, and a final outcome that differed from initial results — creating widespread public confusion about who won. Election administrators in smaller counties lack the software and training to run RCV reliably; scaling it federally would require massive infrastructure investment.”
How It Works
The Format
Standard SuperDebate: two people, cross-examination, moderated from start to finish
Opening Argument
PRO · opening case
Cross-Examination
CON questions PRO
Opening Argument
CON · opening case
Cross-Examination
PRO questions CON
Rebuttal
PRO
Rebuttal
CON
Closing Statement
PRO · final case
Closing Statement
CON · final case
Audience Vote
You pick the winner
~28 minutes of debate · audience vote follows closing statements
Don't Miss It
Stay in the Loop
The debate drops when the two sides are confirmed. Get the email the moment it goes live.
Premieres
Tuesday, July 21, 2026 · 7:00 PM EDT
Get Involved
Open debate runs on the people who show up. Tell us how you want to be part of it.
More Debates
Structured debates on the ideas that matter most. You score who makes the stronger case.
Jordan vs. LeBron: The GOAT SuperDebate
Watch the full recorded Jordan vs. LeBron GOAT basketball debate, argued by championship debaters, then score both debaters live.
DEI: More Harm Than Good?
DEI stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Wilfred Reilly and Armand Domalewski debate whether DEI programs move institutions toward equality, or create a new paradigm for inequality.
UBI Debate: Should America Have a Universal Basic Income?
Scott Santens (PRO) vs Malcolm Collins (CON) debate the resolution: "An unconditional basic income would be net beneficial for American citizens." — July 10, 2026, 2 PM CT.
Messi vs Ronaldo: Who Is the Soccer GOAT?
Two debaters. Assigned sides. Cross-examination. One argues the case for Messi, the other for Ronaldo — in a structured debate format with opening arguments and rebuttals.