Letter to the editor: Ranked choice voting gives us more choices

After last week’s debate, I tuned in to Jon Stewart’s post-debate show on Comedy Central. Before it began, “South Park” played an episode about voting for a new school mascot. Their options? “Giant Douche” versus “Turd Sandwich.” Why couldn’t he vote for something cool, like a tiger? The character didn’t want to vote at all.

After the debate, that feeling may be familiar.

We don’t have more options because our winner-takes-all system creates a two-party system where nobody wins. Our voters have fewer choices, our candidates are more divisive and our elected officials often win their primary without majority support from their base.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Ranked choice voting is an easy upgrade to our election system that lets third parties run without fear of stealing votes from their closest allies in the race.

With ranked choice voting, you can vote for a third party without throwing away your vote. Tiger could have run, and if he had no shot of winning, people who voted for him would still have a say in whether they prefer Giant Douche or Turd Sandwich.

With ranked choice voting, we get more choices.

Armin Samii

Lawrenceville