In a stunning victory, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist and community organizer, toppled a former governor and political machine, clinching a historic victory in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor. His victory was made possible by Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Voters were given options, rather than being boxed into binary choices or manipulated by fear. Instead, they built a coalition of values and won. RCV didn’t just change how people vote. It changed who has power. With RCV, Mamdani was able to build a coalition across issue areas, working with fellow progressive Brad Lander to run a shared ranked strategy: “You rank me, I’ll rank you.” It worked.
Ranked Choice Voting didn’t elect a candidate. It elevated a movement.
So, why are we still stuck with the old system here in Pennsylvania?
The Problem with Our Current Elections
Pennsylvania still uses first-past-the-post elections, meaning whoever gets the most votes wins, even if they fall far short of a majority. When an election is between two candidates, that might seem fine. However, increasingly, we are seeing crowded races, and first-past-the-post is a recipe for dysfunction.
We are often forced to “vote strategically”, picking the lesser evil, not our actual favorite. And candidates spend more time attacking each other than trying to earn broad support. The result? A system that fuels polarization, discourages new voices, and undermines our faith in democracy.
That’s exactly what happened in New York City. Mamdani and his allies campaigned on solidarity — “Rank me first, rank Brad Lander second” — and built a winning alliance that would’ve been crushed under traditional rules.
What Ranked Choice Voting Actually Does
Forget the wonky diagrams and high school civics videos. Here’s what RCV means in real, tangible terms: