Majorities, Pluralities, Write-In's
There are reasons to prefer majority-winner elections — and that means run-offs — over simple plurality systems. But there are reasons for write-in voting on the final ballot even at the risk of non-majority winners … and persistently slower tabulation.
On what’s left of the bird site, Stephen Wolf1 tweaks the WaPo for a fundamental factual flub:
By virtue of top-two primaries, ranked-choice systems, or post-elction-day run-offs, several states require the winning candidate to achieve a strict majority (50% + 12) rather than a plurality (more votes than the next-best rival).
In particular, CA recently adopted a top-two primary3 and an Election Day run-off, with no space for write-in votes on the final ballot … so the successful candidate (barring tie-breakers) must do better than break-even.
In contrast, WA now uses a top-two primary with an Election Day run-off, but write-in votes are allowed — we might even say encouraged4 — so the “top two” contestants could split the field narrowly, producing a plurality winner, say 49.97% to 49.93% with 0.1% write-in votes.
Is this madness? In my view it is not — even though pure binary ballot questions with majority winners are the only ones that are free of paradoxical effects.
Write-in voting — though a pain in the butt for elections administrators — provides a safety valve for several vagaries of the elections process.
A major candidate may “leave the field” via death or disability late in the game … even after ballots have been printed. In most states, political parties “own” their ballot lines, but party-controlled replacement procedures and timelines vary all over the map — and even if applicable may not produce the choice a party’s voters are looking for.
A candidate may literally or figuratively “leave the field” in many other ways, at any time. Massive late-breaking scandal. Technical disqualification due to forged or defective nominating documents, residency issues, or insurrectionist status. Withdrawal to pursue more attractive career options. Change of heart. Even exposure as an imposter, or a “plant” covertly serving the opposing party. [Write-in winner: Linda Smith, WA-03 1994 GOP primary.]
Where parties control their respective ballot lines, nominating processes may exclude a more electable candidate. Party-internal “office politics” and/or personal pique. Departures from “party line” dogma — which primary/caucus voters tend to punish, and general election voters tend to reward. Or the ordinary “spoiler” paradoxical effects of voting systems. [Write-in winner: Lisa Murkowski, AK 2010.]
Where parties no longer control ballot lines (as is trending in western states), a “top-two” preliminary can yield two Democrats in a bright red district where more numerous Republican hopefuls fragment the vote — or vice versa in blue turf. [Blue WA habitually elects a GOP Sec of State, but 2022 found none on the final ballot. A late GOP write-in won over 100,000 votes.]
In nonpartisan top-two preliminaries, a “center squeeze” can produce unsatisfactory options. [A 2021 City Attorney final ballot gave voters the choice of a justice system “abolitionist” or a crypto-Republican hard-line prosecutor — an agonizing choice for the vast majority of Seattle voters.]
In a variety of settings (including ranked choice), candidates may collude with covert confederates to manipulate the process (such as by late withdraw-and-endorse tactics) to pool support and/or knock out disfavored rivals, effectively denying voters the good-faith choices they thought they were making.
In all cases, though it is rarely exercised successfully, the write-in option provides a safety valve in the seat-filling process — as well as an emotional safety valve for pissed-off voters.
In my view, there is institutional merit in giving voters the opportunity for genuine self-expression, even when (as usually the case) it does not change the outcome.
And this is in spite of my preference for majorities over pluralities … and my abiding awareness of the paradoxical potential inherent in multiple-choice ballots.
Technically 50% plus 0.5, with an odd number of votes.
Or “preliminary”, for terminological sticklers who would reserve “primary” for partisan ballot-line nominating contests.
A WA write-in candidate is one who skipped the formal filing process (in late May or so) but has to have their write-in votes tabulated — and such candidates may register with election officials as late as 8pm Election Day!!! See this Crosscut explainer for background.