Last week, New Hampshire’s House Democratic caucus used ranked choice voting (RCV) to choose Representative Renny Cushing as their new leader. The race featured four candidates and required three rounds of counting before a majority winner emerged.

Anyone following American politics closely knows that the national popular vote in presidential elections is always interesting, but never decisive. Who wins and loses the White House is all about the results in the Electoral College.

Ranked choice voting draws growing support as a sensible solution to problems with our elections, with backers including leading newspapers, elected leaders, democracy reform commissions, and organizations.

A new study comparing the usage of different voting methods provides additional evidence that despite the conventional wisdom, ranked choice voting may lead to fewer voided ballots.

Asbestos proves that the value of RCV stretches beyond politics. For any decision with more than two options, RCV provides an easy, fair way to pick one acceptable to most voters.

Not only could ranked choice voting pass in a historic seven ballot measures this November, but it will be used in important elections across the country. Voters will elect leader with RCV in one state, one county and seven cities.

Georgia voters have had their patience tested this year. Voters are being asked to vote repeatedly — and may face three more elections by January 5, 2021.

The final city to put RCV on the ballot this year was Boulder (CO), where the city council joined with local reformers to place a measure to move from having the council select the mayor to voters electing the mayor directly with ranked choice voting.

There’s quite a difference between such debate brawls and the more civil debates we see in presidential primaries that are different in a key respect: inclusion of more longshot candidates.

It’s time for a bigger number of electoral votes — and a new number of House seats.