What is Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) and why must we kill it?

First, it’s unconstitutional. So it must not become law, so let’s kill it in its crib. That’s easy to say, right? But how is it unconstitutional?

I’ll go more into why it’s unconstitutional towards the end of this post, but the no-brainer reason is it’s confusing.

You see, RCV ballots DO NOT meet the constitutional requirement for clarity and simplicity as mandated by Article 2 Section 1A.1(a) of the Nevada Constitution. The ranking system confuses voters, especially those less familiar with this method, leading to a higher rate of spoiled ballots and disenfranchisement.

Boom, it’s dead, just with that. But let me go on.

What exactly is RCV?

It’s very confusing, but I will try to make it as simple as I can for you.

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is a method of voting that allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference instead of voting for just one candidate (you know because when you vote for a person you want to vote for everyone in their race, right? Ridiculous).

  1. Ranking Candidates: When you vote, you list the candidates in the order you prefer them. You put your favorite candidate as number one, your second favorite as number two, and so on. You can rank as many or as few candidates as you like.
  2. Counting First Choices: Initially, only the first-choice votes are counted. If one candidate gets more than half of these first-choice votes right away, they win, just like in a regular election.
  3. Eliminating the Lowest-Ranked Candidate: If no one gets more than half of the votes in the first round, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated from the race. But rather than wasting the votes of the people who preferred the eliminated candidate, those votes get transferred to their next choice.
  4. Reallocating Votes: For example, let’s say your top choice was Candidate A, but Candidate A got the fewest votes and is out. If you ranked Candidate B as your second choice, your vote now counts for Candidate B.
  5. Repeating the Process: This process of eliminating the lowest-ranked candidate and reallocating their votes continues until a candidate has more than half of the votes and is declared the winner.

So you get that?

Basically, you’re forced to pick a whole bunch of people, instead of one; votes from the lesser vote-getters get shuffled up towards the higher vote-getters until the one with the highest vote wins.

Total racket, right?

Most folks don’t even know how voting works the regular way, let alone this insane system run by an ALGORITHM!

Yes, folks, another algorithm. Remember when we exposed an algorithm that made every precinct in the two largest counties vote exactly the same? Well, here’s another algorithm! I’m sure everything is totally legit with this one too… right?

So we have liberals who say minorities are too dumb to get an ID, let alone show it to vote. But this somehow, is less complicated than showing an ID? Do you see their hypocrisy?

This is 100% a way to rig the election, with no means of checking the algorithm or ensuring the vote-getters are really the proper winners.

So right here, it should be dead in the water, but as promised I will give the ACLU, DNC, GOP, RNC, NAACP, etc., the in-crayon version of why this is unconstitutional and why someone must sue to keep this from becoming law.

Here you go lawyers:

  1. Violation of Clarity and Simplicity in Ballots: RCV ballots DO NOT meet the constitutional requirement for clarity and simplicity as mandated by Section 1A.1(a) of the Nevada Constitution. The ranking system will confuse voters, especially those less familiar with this method, potentially leading to a higher rate of spoiled ballots and disenfranchisement.
  2. Potential for Voter Disenfranchisement: RCV will disenfranchise voters who do not fully understand the ranking process or those who choose to only vote for one candidate, as their votes may become “exhausted” if their chosen candidate is eliminated early in the counting process. This is a violation of the voter’s right to have their preferences accurately recorded and counted as specified in Section 1A.1(b).
  3. Uniformity and Standardization Issues: RCV fails to meet the constitutional requirement for a “uniform, statewide standard for counting and recounting all votes” (Section 1A.10). The variability in understanding and implementing the RCV process across different counties will lead to inconsistencies in how votes are counted and results are determined.
  4. Accuracy of Vote Counting: The iterative counting and redistribution of votes in RCV complicates the vote counting process, leading to errors and a lack of transparency in how votes are reallocated, thereby challenging the requirement for accurate recording of voter preference.
  5. Constitutional Amendment Requirement: Changing from a traditional plurality voting system to RCV constitutes a fundamental change in the electoral process that requires a constitutional amendment rather than just legislative action, given the broad implications on voting rights and election integrity.
  6. Impact on Minor Parties and Candidates: RCV is often touted as beneficial for minor parties, it might actually harm these parties by encouraging strategic voting, thus undermining the principle of equal access to the election system without discrimination as stated in Section 1A.9.
  7. Legal Precedent and Interpretive Challenges: There is lack of precedent within Nevada for handling disputes and legal challenges inherent to RCV, which will lead to prolonged electoral disputes and inconsistencies in judicial interpretations of electoral outcomes.
  8. Complexity in Voting Instructions and Voter Education: RCV violates the rights to receive clear instructions and assistance in voting (Sections 1A.2 and 1A.6). The learning curve associated with RCV will necessitate significantly more comprehensive voter education efforts, which would absolutely be inadequately provided.

See why it must die? What can you do? Share this post with the ACLU, DNC, GOP, RNC, NAACP, etc., and ask them to sue! Ask all your local and state representatives, and demand RCV be removed from the ballot as it is clearly unconstitutional. Ask them to publicly endorse killing RCV from the ballot, then do it!

Folks, enough is enough. Peacefully get involved and call this out.


Nevada Constitution Article 2 Section 1a

Sec. 1A.  Rights of voters.  Each voter who is a qualified elector under this Constitution and is registered to vote in accordance with Section 6 of this Article and the laws enacted by the Legislature pursuant thereto has the right:

1.  To receive and cast a ballot that:

(a) Is written in a format that allows the clear identification of candidates; and

(b) Accurately records the voter’s preference in the selection of candidates.

2.  To have questions concerning voting procedures answered and to have an explanation of the procedures for voting posted in a conspicuous place at the polling place.

3.  To vote without being intimidated, threatened or coerced.

4.  To vote during any period for early voting or on election day if the voter is waiting in line at a polling place at which, by law, the voter is entitled to vote at the time that the polls close and the voter has not already cast a vote in that election.

5.  To return a spoiled ballot and receive another ballot in its place.

6.  To request assistance in voting, if necessary.

7.  To a sample ballot which is accurate, informative and delivered in a timely manner as provided by law.

8.  To receive instruction in the use of the equipment for voting during any period for early voting or on election day.

9.  To equal access to the elections system without discrimination, including, without limitation, discrimination on the basis of race, age, disability, military service, employment or overseas residence.

10.  To a uniform, statewide standard for counting and recounting all votes accurately as provided by law.

11.  To have complaints about elections and election contests resolved fairly, accurately and efficiently as provided by law.

These thoughts, statements, and opinions are my own, not of any club, committee, organization, etc.

Follow us on:

Share This Content