Post #2800009

one of the benefits of ranked-choice voting is that it often requires a candidate to earn >50% of the vote for them to succeed, which theoretically would hopefully result in better satisfaction of candidates - under the current "first past the post" system, a lot of people win with a minority of the overall vote (often 40% of the vote or less), which predictably leads to nobody being particularly happy with their representatives now, I don't think ranked-choice voting will solve corruption or dissatisfaction with representatives who don't fulfill their promises, _but_ I do think it would help the situation and make it harder for bad representatives to get elected (or re-elected)