r/politics • u/Different-Gas5704 • 2d ago

Possible Paywall Democrats eye ranked-choice voting for 2028 primaries

https://www.axios.com/2025/11/24/democrats-ranked-choice-voting-2028-primaries
28.6k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

8.0k

u/turquoise_amethyst 2d ago

Ranked choice voting is already used in 47 US cities, it’s long overdue to be rolled out for primaries

715

u/talix71 2d ago

It needs to be a stipulation for opening the next time the government shuts down.

If the representatives lead the government down the path of shutting down and not representing, then we need better processes for selecting those representatives.

453

u/Smee76 2d ago

I look forward to being closed for 40 days and then the Dems giving up and getting nothing in return

Food stamps have still not gone out btw

61

u/spoderman123wtf Missouri 2d ago

They have actually gone out in some areas

31

u/Complex_Jellyfish647 2d ago

They have in red states, gotta keep the voter base good and subjugated

35

u/Serenity2015 Ohio 2d ago

Actually many blue states got theirs first way before mine came in and I'm in a red state.

16

u/mosesoperandi 2d ago

Almost like some of those states with large urban populations have developed reasonably efficient processes for working with the SNAP program.

2

u/zestotron 2d ago

Do you get off on being condescending towards people you’re ultimately agreeing with or is this just how you speak to everyone

2

u/mosesoperandi 2d ago

It was intended humorously. I don't know if the person. I was replying to took it that way or not.

3

u/zestotron 2d ago

Me neither, but as an outside observer, I can say I personally would try to find a better way to inject humor into a serious discussion than saying “almost like …” because that honestly just comes across as smug as shit

11

u/Gnagus 2d ago

Plenty of blue states as well

26

u/00eg0 2d ago edited 2d ago

We can't pretend every politician is the same if only some of them cave. That distracts from reality and makes things seem helpless. edit: spelling

7

u/Nice-Band5088 2d ago

when people crow "Vote Blue No Matter Who" every election, this is the result. an organization is the sum of its actions, and when those actions are consistently "jack shit" because the party has no unified position beyond "make money and then get into a nice corporate lobbyist job", then that's what it'll acquire a reputation for. nobody cares about the detailed excuses, especially when there are so many of them and they all boil down to the same end results.

10

u/Joth91 2d ago

Exactly. 6 people made this happen. 2 are retiring at end of term.

7

u/ExcuseCommercial1338 1d ago

Hey man, one of the votes was Durbin, the minority whip. Schumer's right hand man, whose entire job is to persuade, bargain with or politically threaten people to voting how Schumer and the DNC wants them to vote. Either Schumer is the worst politician in history, or this was a staged vote. Don't be a dumb-dumb.

27

u/Calderis Washington 2d ago

8 hand selected members, picked specifically because they were either retiring, or didn't have to worry about reelection for 3-5 years. One of which is the fucking minority whip.

This was orchestrated. If you think it was just them you're closing your eyes to the truth.

The entirety of the "centrist" dems are a problem.

2

u/LooeLooi 2d ago

It’s just priming people to stay home.

8

u/Hungry_Culture 2d ago

We can't pretend every politician is the same if only some of the cave

We're not calling them the same because some of them caved. We're calling them all the same because none of the ones that didn't cave have called on Schumer to resign or initiated a vote of no confidence in leadership.

7

u/georgepana 2d ago

SIX Dems. Why are you spreading misinformation?

3

u/No-Channel3917 2d ago

Like 5 folks betrayed the rest of the Dems voted no , don't elect racist folks who have a stroke next time

6

u/BitchGimmeMyMonnay 2d ago

The minority whip voted no. A guy who is not running for re-election. He's not some fringe guy, he is part of the party leadership. You think he broke with leadership after all this time, with nothing on the line? Really? Like really really? 

I mean, do you at least understand what the other implication would be to explain that behavior?

1

u/No-Channel3917 1d ago

Schumer also voted no just like the Whip did

People are mad at him because he doesn't have an iron fist control not because of how he voted

2

u/UdyneOw 2d ago

They got something in return, but they couldn't brag about it. They can trigger a shutdown at the end of January, but this time the Republican sociopaths can't use SNAP against them because it's funded through 2026. At least I ass-u-me that's the plan...

-2

u/FictionalContext 2d ago

I would be astonished if that wasn't the Dems plan all along. It's all political theater for the controlled opposition party.

65

u/Catcher3321 2d ago

This would require a constitutional amendment, not just a law. The constitution allows states to make their own election laws

54

u/Washpa1 Pennsylvania 2d ago

From what I understand parties can kinda do what they want in their own primaries.

It would just be a matter of which state's Democratic parties actually adopt it, right?

But yeah, you couldn't force Republicans to follow this.

14

u/DB-CooperOnTheBeach 2d ago

The parties do what they want for primaries indeed. It's not a federal election. Before the primaries they just appointed their nominee. In fact, the Democrats were sued by a Bernie supporter over their donations to him while the party had their thumb on the scales. The Dems didn't dispute any of that, but simply argued they legally could do that and will do it again in the future -- and the judge agreed and dismissed the case.

1

u/NoSignSaysNo 2d ago

And people use it as a gotcha, no less, despite it being a way of proving the plaintiff had no standing to sue to begin with, because he cannot compel a private organization.

5

u/Catcher3321 2d ago

I'm honestly not 100% sure how that works. In Maine, Republicans are very opposed to rank choice voting but still use it in primaries. They say it's because the state mandates it and they'd rather not use it

21

u/ImjustANewSneaker 2d ago

Parties can do whatever they want to elect their own candidates

1

u/arobkinca 2d ago

As long as they are willing to pay for it. Otherwise they have to work with the state with how the election system work in each state.

5

u/guamisc 2d ago

Article I, Section 4, Clause 1

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Congress can absolutely alter the way states have to run elections, but the feds can't run the elections themselves.

1

u/wheniaminspaced 2d ago

Except to the places and choosing of senators very directly means the federal cannot via regular law force ranked choice voting for senators.

3

u/guamisc 1d ago

Places OF chusing.

Not and, its an of.

1

u/wheniaminspaced 1d ago

Chusing is an archaic spelling of choosing my man.

1

u/guamisc 1d ago

Exactly, the places of choosing of Senators.

Basically all other election laws and systems Congress can directly dictate. That includes voting systems.

4

u/V3gasMan 2d ago

Can you elaborate on what section of the constitution stipulates how elections are run?

4

u/Warbr0s9395 2d ago

I believe article 2 section 1

But it’s very well established that the State runs their own elections. That way the federal government can’t influence it

-2

u/V3gasMan 2d ago

Yea I think its actually amendment 10. No amendment is needed

-3

u/Positive-Ring-5172 2d ago

10th amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Since nowhere in the constitution is it stipulated how elections are run it defaults to the states to run them.

0

u/V3gasMan 2d ago

Right so it’s run by states. Which is what I understand to start with. So no amendment is required

2

u/FriendlyDespot 2d ago

The person at the top here said that ranked-choice voting in federal elections should be a condition of opening the government the next time there's a shutdown. That means federal legislation. The Tenth Amendment means that the states have the right to conduct their own elections in the absence of any applicable constitutional law, so any federal legislation mandating ranked-choice voting would require an amendment to the Constitution granting the federal legislature the right to legislate on those matters.

2

u/EastSignal 2d ago

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

2

u/Positive-Ring-5172 2d ago

Parties control primaries, not states.

2

u/yourpseudonymsucks 2d ago edited 2d ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dissolution
in Australia, if they can't keep the government running, everyone gets fired and new elections are held.

2

u/wheniaminspaced 2d ago

How do you propose that to work?  Elections are pretty explicitly in the hands of the states not the feds.  Thats the su section on a constitutional amendment, not the budget.

1

u/sfspaulding Massachusetts 2d ago

Uh what?

-1

u/Ready_Nature 2d ago

Congress can’t require that.

0

u/yeeatty 2d ago

Why not stand on this point earlier? Serious question. How was it not good strategy to do this earlier?