We need a voting method which allows voters to indicate backup choices, especially in volatile races with crowded fields such as this one.  

Let’s take a look at the novel way in which RCV was used in Nevada and how it impacted results. 

For the first time, the Nevada caucuses implemented ranked choice voting (RCV) in its successful early voting process—prompting Vox to label RCV a “winner” of the caucuses.

In “Making Sense of the Iowa Debacle,” Michael Brendan Dougherty writes for the conservative-leaning National Review that instant-runoff voting (also known as ranked choice voting) emerged from the Iowa caucuses as a process-winner.

As Nevada prepares to host what many believe may be the last presidential nominating caucuses, Iowans have advice on what Nevada and Iowa might do in the future.

New Hampshire’s presidential primaries certainly ran more smoothly than Iowa’s caucuses, but the results illustrate a pitfall of crowded fields — the “wasted vote”. 

Delays in results for the Iowa Democratic Caucus have led to increased scrutiny over the way we conduct our presidential elections. Administrative difficulties in running the Iowa Caucus, as well as voters’ frustrations navigating through the large pool of candidates, have led to wide calls for reform, most notably Ranked Choice Voting (RCV).