Tuesday's NJ primary needs ranked choice voting

Dear John,

New Jersey primary voters will pick their nominees for governor on Tuesday – among the most-watched races of 2025. It’s an incredibly crowded field, particularly for the Democrats, whose primary has been riddled with personal attacks as six strong candidates vie for support.

Our frustrating “pick-one” system disempowers voters and leads to polarizing and unrepresentative outcomes. A candidate could win with just a fraction of voters behind them. Voters are stuck trying to guess the strongest candidate among they might vote for, but the polls are so scattered as to be no help at all

Tuesday's New Jersey primary is a textbook example of an election that would benefit from ranked choice voting (RCV). Within primaries, RCV would incentivize positive campaigning, ensure winning candidates have majority support, and give voters the freedom to vote their conscience without fear of “spoilers.”

Earlier this week, I shared some of my thoughts on how RCV could improve primaries – in the Garden State and everywhere else – in an op-ed and interview for RealClearPolitics, which you can watch below.

Ranked choice voting empowers voters and strengthens party nominees

Recent research also shows how ranked choice voting in primaries is good for candidates, voters, and parties alike:

A just-updated Northwestern University and FairVote study found candidates who win their primaries without majority support are 11.3 percentage points less likely to win the general election than those who win with majority support. RCV gives candidates that majority. The study also finds that non-majority winners are more ideologically extreme and tend to be lower-quality candidates on a number of different measures.
RCV makes campaigns more positive – because candidates need to build consensus beyond their political base, and appeal to voters who may rank another candidate first on their ballot. A 2022 study from the Center for Campaign Innovation found a Virginia Republican congressional nominee coming out of an RCV primary with a +78% favorability rating, compared to just +51% for a nominee coming out of a choose-one primary in a neighboring district.
The Center for Campaign Innovation also found that 56% voters in the RCV primary preferred RCV over single-choice voting – adding to a growing body of evidence that when voters use RCV, they like it and want to keep using it.

We’ve seen these benefits in practice:

In 2021, Virginia Republicans faced a similar situation to today’s New Jersey Democrats – a crowded primary for governor with candidates from multiple wings of the party. The Virginia GOP turned to ranked choice voting to solve the problem. Glenn Youngkin was the majority winner, expanding his support from 33% of voters’ first choices to 55% in the RCV count. Youngkin had a unified party behind him – and he became the first Republican elected governor of Virginia in 12 years.
Democrats in Pennsylvania, Republicans in Indiana, and Utahns of both parties have also used RCV to choose consensus nominees in crowded fields.

Tuesday's New Jersey primary is a textbook example of an election that would benefit from ranked choice voting

Poll after poll finds huge majorities of voters frustrated with our political system and longing for more options at the ballot box. In that way, crowded primaries like New Jersey’s – and the many we’ll see in 2026 – are a good thing.

But we also need the tools to make the most of greater choice – instead of it causing its own problems, like driving further polarization, frustrating voters, and making our campaign cycles ever more toxic.

Ranked choice voting allows lots of choices and majority winners to go hand in hand. In the end, that leads to stronger nominees, more unified parties, and most importantly, more satisfied voters. RCV would improve the New Jersey primary, just like it has improved elections across the country.

Onward with thanks,

Meredith Sumpter,
FairVote President and CEO

Donate Today