Perhaps the most watched election this week was the Democratic gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin, in which Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley narrowly defeated the DSA candidate, state Rep. Francesca Hong.
It was a chance for the media to focus on the ongoing “civil war” within the party between center-left Democrats and the growing influence of Democratic Socialists.
Crowley’s win, by just under 3,800 votes, was presented as a sign that the DSA still hasn’t taken over the party in critical swing states. But what is missing from the conversation is that the most consequential votes were not for Crowley or Hong.
They were the over 68,000 votes that had been cast for candidates who were no longer in the race.
The "Zombie Vote"
Three candidates dropped out of the race before the August 11 primary—Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez in mid-July, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes on July 30, and Missy Hughes in June.
However, Rodriguez and Barnes dropped out after many voters already cast an absentee ballot.
Early voting for the primary began on July 28. However, early absentee voting began earlier than that. County clerks started mailing out requested absentee ballots by June 25—well before Rodriguez and Barnes announced their exit.
More than 150,000 ballots had been cast by August 3—meaning tens of thousands of voters had already cast their ballots before voters knew who the last candidates standing would be.
Rodriguez finished in fifth place with 32,688 votes, Barnes finished close behind with 32,415 votes. Even Hughes almost reached the gap between Crowley and Hong at 3,237.
In total, more than 68,000 ballots were cast for a candidate who suspended their campaign. These are what the national voting reform group FairVote calls “zombie votes.”
The votes exist, but they are for candidates no longer running. The voter can’t do anything about it. They can’t change their vote. Once the ballot is cast, there are no “do-overs.”
Under the current system, there is no way to know who these voters would have preferred among the remaining candidates. Would Crowley have won by a bigger margin? Would Hong have beaten him? Would it have been an even tighter race?
These are questions that will never be answered. FairVote argues this is where reform matters.
If, for example, Wisconsin used ranked choice voting and voters ranked candidates in order of preference, observers would know who Rodriguez voters preferred of the top performing candidates. And who Barnes voters preferred.
The point of ranked choice voting is not solely to get to a majority winner. It is also to show who voters would cast a ballot for if their top pick wasn’t in the race, dropped out, or were otherwise removed from the ballot.
Under ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates in order of preference (first choice, second choice, third choice, etc). If no candidate gets a majority of the vote—in this case, no candidate cleared 40%— then the last place candidate is eliminated, and their voters’ next choices are factored into the results.
Subsequent rounds of instant runoff are held until a candidate has over 50% of the vote.
The point is to give every voter a chance to have a say in the final outcome without their ballot being discarded entirely for voting for a candidate who performed poorly or dropped out.
For example, once Barnes and Rodriguez were eliminated under ranked choice voting, their voters’ next choices would be added to the tabulation. The people who cast a ballot for them would still have a vote that counts.
A Problem That Impacts Millions of Voters Every Election
FairVote asserts that the “zombie vote” issue is a problem nationwide, especially in presidential preference elections. The group reports that in 2020, 3 million Democratic primary votes went to a candidate that had already bowed out of contention.
This is one reason many ranked choice voting supporters oppose an effort within the national Democratic Party to ban the use of ranked choice voting in 2028, which would adopt a similar policy already in place within the Republican Party.
Voters cannot be expected to predict party maneuvering. Candidates don’t drop out solely for personal reasons. In 2020, the Democratic field cleared quickly in order to unite behind Biden.
This year, in Wisconsin, it was about the party establishment vs. the DSA.
FairVote and other voting reform advocates assert that voters should not be denied meaningful choice in an election because of the never-ending game of chess the two major parties play to give themselves an advantage.
“With ranked choice voting, voters need not worry about reading the tea leaves in a shifting field; if their first choice drops out, their vote counts for their next choice,” writes Matthew Oberstaedt and Avery Hyde for FairVote.
“This ensures every voter has a say in the election, no matter when they vote.