Your vote probably won’t matter.  Try not to take it personally.  Statistically, most of our votes don’t matter.  It’s the nature of our voting system.  The winner – the last man or woman standing – gets all the toys.  They don’t have to compromise.  All those other ideas from the losing candidates?  Trashed along with our votes.

There are better ways.

In this election, the Democrats had, what, 57 candidates?  Mostly, that was a little weird, but one of the wonderful parts was that every candidate had some good ideas.  I can’t think of any hopeful who didn’t impress me at least once. And every newcomer represented a new body of voters.  All of them talked about the issues from their unique positions.  They were good and honorable people with important things to say.  More to the point, every candidate moved the conversation.  When Beto O’Rourke said, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15!” his courage mattered.  Like it or hate it, every other candidate either shifted in that same direction or moved away. His actions made a difference.

It’s worth repeating that the press covers that part terribly. The media try to create a cult of personality.  Why?  Because polling is super-easy to do.  Trouble is that it’s jumping the gun.  Candidates don’t jump on the stage, fully formed.  They don’t magically know every nuance of what their party wants.  A significant purpose of a primary is to forge the party platform in the marketplace of ideas.  Because of Sanders, every candidate had to address single-payer healthcare.  Because of Warren, every campaign was asked about college debt.  Because of Beto O’Rourke, campaigns couldn’t dodge gun control.  And every single woman wouldn’t get shoved off the stage.  But the media mostly covered polls (“Who do you love!”) and the fights they stage.

OK, and money.  Every day, every source reported the fundraising horserace as if that was real news.  Warren has THIS much money, Biden only has THAT much, when Steyer has spent THAT much.  As if campaign funding was the most important thing about a candidate. No, Suzy Creamcheese, money is not a virtue.

At the same time, I know we don’t elect ideas, principles, or positions; we choose individuals.  I get that.  But that selection is supposed to be the last step, not the first.  It’s a package: the best person with the best platform.

So, why do I say most of your votes don’t matter?  Because most elections only ask one question: who is your first choice?  Nothing else.  They ask the same question about a long list of positions, but it’s always that one question.  Who’s your first choice?  After that, shut up.  Nobody cares.

If you voted for someone who didn’t win, your vote just went in the trash.  It doesn’t influence the outcome.  The only votes that matter are the ones cast for the winner.  If you vote for someone who didn’t win, you wasted your vote.  It’s simple.  That’s why if we have, I don’t know, five candidates, it’s almost a guarantee that the winner won’t have more than a plurality. Most people cast votes for someone who didn’t win.  Maybe they’re OK with the winner, but no guarantees.

Does that really make sense?  Why on earth would we want to select candidates who most of us didn’t want?  And we’ve alienated the majority of our own voters.

Here’s an example.  Imagine a wide field of candidates.  The top candidates are good, well-know politicians.  Almost all the voters will talk up their virtues.  The problem is that nobody stands out, so they split the vote between them.  The fourth candidate is a wingnut; they’re a snorting, mouth-breathing nutbar full of nonsense and bile, topping a posse of voters who love their doofus beyond all reason.  The popular candidates split the majority vote, and the wingnut wins by default.

Yes, that’s the Trump story.  Doesn’t that seem like a sucky way to run an election?

Everyone heard about Ranked Choice Voting (RCV)?  That’s an election where you list all the candidates you like in descending order.  Your first choice, second, third, going as deep as you care.  After the votes are counted, if one candidate got over 50%, we’re done.  That person wins, the same as always.  But if no candidate got a majority, you go to the voters who chose the last-place candidate and switch them to their second choices.  Add up the field again.  Keep doing that until someone finally tops 50%.  In the end, the winner was at least one of the top choices of a majority of the voters.  And everyone has skin in the game.

Now imagine a Democratic convention where nobody walks in the door with a clear majority.  Like, I don’t know, the 2020 election?  Lots of suitable candidates with plenty of popular ideas, but no single winner.  In our current system, the party insiders rub their hands and get ready to play.  Not much fun for someone like me, who doesn’t love the Democratic establishment.

But imagine you could ask the smaller candidates what they would like?  Every candidate comes into the convention with delegates.  Right now, those votes don’t matter, and the candidates are cut loose.  In the Ranked Choice system, they could always release their delegates completely, the same as now.  Or they could suggest their delegates shift to someone who the losing person thinks reflects their ideas the best. Now imagine the horse-trading as the high-scoring candidate court each also-ran, minority candidate.  Joe Biden would have to get concrete about his healthcare plan.  Warren and Biden could arrive at a joint position. Buttigieg and Steyer would have their own influence.  Any Klobuchar, a popular woman, would have a voice.  Want to bet how many new, popular positions the top finishers would incorporate into their platforms?

And we’d end up a group of candidates, positions, and policies that the majority of Democrats at least liked.  Most of us would have skin in the game. And the noxious idea of a ‘spoiler candidate’ would disappear.  If the next Ralph Nader wants to run for President, I say we let him!  He brings new ideas, excites a different part of the electorate.  He may not win, but under Ranked Choice voting, he won’t drag down the other candidates.

I’m writing this on Super Tuesday, which is deeply frustrating for most voters.  I get to watch dozens of TV talking heads discard vast swaths of voters.  Every also-ran candidate silently drops off the video charts as famous media figures point at each newly predicted winner. 

I’m actually lusting after Ranked Choice Voting.  Embarrassing, but true.  It’s sexy, and I’m tired of feeling like my votes don’t matter.