Yes, but only because the ranked choice voting in the Democratic primary likely gave some voters/organizers/donaters confidence to back a longshot candidate like Mamdani, which eventually snowballed into a plurality win in the first round of the primary, a majority win after ranked choice took effect, and a polling lead in the first past the post general election. Still a success story, I’d say, but not a direct and unquestionable cause/effect chain
This is exactly it. This is why ranked choice voting is so important as a tool to help break the two-party duopoly. Proportional representation being the next step.
Am I right that this is at least in part attributable to ranked choice voting?
Yes, but only because the ranked choice voting in the Democratic primary likely gave some voters/organizers/donaters confidence to back a longshot candidate like Mamdani, which eventually snowballed into a plurality win in the first round of the primary, a majority win after ranked choice took effect, and a polling lead in the first past the post general election. Still a success story, I’d say, but not a direct and unquestionable cause/effect chain
This is exactly it. This is why ranked choice voting is so important as a tool to help break the two-party duopoly. Proportional representation being the next step.
The general election isn’t ranked choice.