This is how we do it now:
This is how we could be doing it:
Consider these simulations that illustrate how Plurality Voting systematically bias us into two extreme candidates.
This creates more choices in political platforms for citizens!
America is all about freedom of choice, right? Well if we want to claim the title of strongest democracy, we need to earn it!
It gets us away from "lesser of two evils" thinking. We could support a lot more candidates in our Presidential Elections, instead of limiting it to only 2 front-runners.
Ranked choice voting is an improvement over "just pick one" (plurality voting).
But there are still a few reasons to prefer Approval Voting:
This can be objectively measured as lower Bayesian regret.
It's much more complex to run Instant-Runoff Voting in a decentralized way, as we do now with individual voting precents.
You can maintain basically the same ballot. The only change from how we do it now is instructing "pick all who apply" instead of "just pick one".
via RangeVoting.org
Range Voting is even better than Approval Voting!
It takes into account more information about which candidates are liked/disliked.
It can still be run entirely decentralized.
The only downsides: it's a little bit more complicated, ballots needs to change to add the numbers 0 - 9.
If you know all voters will understand the rules, Range Voting is an even better option than Approval Voting!
(Approval Voting is just a simplified version of Range Voting, where your only options are 0 vs 1.)
I don't want to get into this.
There are good reasons both to remove and support the EC system.
But in either case we could use Approval Voting: with the Electoral College, or for a National Popular Vote.
Either way, Approval Voting would improve things for nearly everyone.