Both Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) and Approval Voting are alternatives to First Past the Post (FPTP) that aim to improve democratic outcomes. However, they have different approaches, advantages, and disadvantages. Let's compare them side by side.

Interactive Comparison

Try both voting systems with the same set of candidates to see how they differ:

Rebuttals to Common RCV Critiques of Approval Voting

1. "RCV Guarantees Majority Support"

RCV Claim: RCV ensures the winner has majority support by eliminating candidates until someone gets 50%+1 votes.

Reality: RCV cannot guarantee majority support when a true majority doesn't exist. Instead, it artificially manufactures "majority" support by discarding votes until the remaining ballots form a majority. This process often eliminates the most broadly acceptable candidate.

The 2022 Alaska Special Election perfectly illustrates this problem:

• Mary Peltola (D) won with 51.4% in the final round
• Nick Begich (R) was eliminated first, despite being the Condorcet winner
• Sarah Palin (R) had strong first-choice support but was polarizing

The pairwise preferences show that Begich was the Condorcet winner—he would have beaten both Peltola and Palin in head-to-head matchups. However, RCV eliminated him first because he had the fewest first-choice votes. This demonstrates how RCV can elect a candidate with less broad support than a centrist.

In approval voting, voters could have approved of multiple candidates they found acceptable. Begich, as a moderate Republican, likely would have received approval from both conservative voters (who preferred him over Peltola) and some moderate Democrats (who preferred him over Palin), giving him a chance to win based on broad acceptability rather than being eliminated due to lack of first-choice support.

2. "Approval Voting Encourages Bullet Voting"

RCV Claim: In approval voting, most voters will vote for one candidate, which is just like First Past the Post.

Reality:When people "vote for one" in approval voting, they're voting for their sincere favorite, not strategically avoiding a "lesser evil." This is actually more honest than RCV's strategic ranking.

In approval voting, voters can express their true preferences without fear of "wasting" their vote. If you only like one candiate, you don't have to worry about your vote 'splitting' the election and helping your least favorite candidate win.

3. "RCV Provides More Expressiveness"

RCV Claim: RCV allows voters to express detailed preferences through ranking, making it more expressive than approval voting.

Reality: The law of large numbers ensures that election results converge to the true preferences of the electorate regardless of how much detail is captured on individual ballots. As noted by Election Science, "the more voters there are, the more likely the election result is to reflect the true preferences of the electorate."

Furthermore, ranking doesn't capture the distance between candidates. A voter might rank Candidate A as 1st and Candidate B as 2nd, but this doesn't tell us whether they strongly prefer A over B or only slightly prefer A. If true expressiveness were the goal, systems like score voting would be superior, as they allow voters to express intensity of preference.

Approval voting strikes the right balance: it captures the essential information (which candidates are acceptable) while remaining simple enough for voters to understand and use correctly. The complexity of RCV's ranking system doesn't translate to better election outcomes.

Advantages of Approval Voting Over RCV

• Simplicity: Much easier to understand and implement
• Cost-effective: Works with existing voting equipment
• No center squeeze: Moderates can win based on broad acceptability
• Reduces strategic voting: Voters can express true preferences
• Prevents vote splitting: Similar candidates don't hurt each other
• Encourages consensus: Candidates must appeal to broader coalitions