The impetus for this post is a recent, casual discussion with a Green Party voter. I suggested that their cause might be well-served by withdrawing Howie Hawkins and instead endorsing Biden. The alternative is to run a spoiler campaign (in appearance or reality).
The result would be, in essence, a fusion candidacy. This would signal willingness to govern — and contest office, which would need to happen in our presidential system — in coalition with Democrats. In turn, the Greens might secure support for the sorts of reforms they are likely to want, e.g., a larger US House, instant runoff voting, you name it. And even if those reforms were not forthcoming, Greens at least would have signaled that they are open to coalition — a fancy way of saying “playing nice.”
The response was as you might expect. The only way that Democrats will come to back reform is by facing threats from spoilers.
The rest of this post focuses on my interlocutor’s theory of reform. As far as Democrats go, some are indeed open to the idea of coalition.
Below is a list of the top ten closet states in the 2016 presidential election, via US News, verbatim. I have added asterisks to those states with divided government, i.e., where Republicans control enough of government to block instant runoff voting. The data on party control are from Ballotpedia.
My post assumes that Republicans are unanimous in their opposition to IRV, based on expectations about the 2020 election. Maybe true; maybe not.
Further, I am not saying that IRV even would matter here. All chatter I’ve seen so far suggests less third-party voting this year than we saw in 2016.
A fuller analysis might cover all 50 states, but this is a good start. The smallest margin in this list is 0.3 percentage points (Michigan). The largest margin is 3.9 points (Arizona). Just for argument, let’s say my friend’s theory of reform does not operate at larger victory margins.
Republicans control enough government to block reform in 8 of these 10 states. There are just two Democratic trifectas. One is in Maine, which will use instant runoff this November. The other is in Nevada. I don’t know what is happening in state government there, but Nevadans for Election Reform did try for a ballot measure.
1. Michigan 0.3 percent*
Trump 47.6 percent, Clinton 47.3 percent
Difference: 13,080 votes
2. New Hampshire 0.4 percent*
Clinton 47.6 percent, Trump 47.2 percent
Difference: 2,701 votes
3. Wisconsin 1 percent*
Trump 47.9 percent, Clinton 46.9 percent
Difference: 27,257 votes
4. Pennsylvania 1.2 percent*
Trump 48.8 percent, Clinton 47.6 percent
Difference: 68,236 votes (99 percent reporting)
5. Florida 1.2 percent (R trifecta)
Trump 49 percent, Clinton 47.8 percent
Difference: 114,455 votes
6. Minnesota 1.5 percent*
Clinton 46.4 percent, Trump 44.9 percent
Difference: 44,470 votes
7. Nevada 2.4 percent (D trifecta)
Clinton 47.9 percent, Trump 45.5 percent
Difference: 26,434 votes
8. Maine 2.7 percent (D trifecta)
Clinton 47.9 percent, Trump 45.2 percent
Difference: 19,995 votes
9. North Carolina 3.8 percent*
Trump 49.9 percent, Clinton 46.1 percent
Difference: 177,009 votes
10. Arizona 3.9 percent (R trifecta)
Trump 49.3 percent, Clinton 45.4 percent
Difference: 91,682 votes