The 2020 Demo­c­ra­t­ic pres­i­den­tial pri­ma­ry is shap­ing up to be an all-out brawl for the nom­i­na­tion. With mul­ti­ple can­di­dates boast­ing impres­sive fundrais­ing hauls, and momen­tum seem­ing­ly shift­ing week to week, it’s unclear if any Demo­c­rat will rise as the con­sen­sus nom­i­nee. And as a num­ber of cam­paigns are being fueled by small-donor con­tri­bu­tions, can­di­dates have lit­tle incen­tive to drop out of the race, no mat­ter their stand­ing in the polls.

Let’s embrace choice, fairness and a truly representative democracy in which the majority really rules.

That’s a recipe for tumult, divi­sion and a plu­ral­i­ty nom­i­nee, poten­tial­ly push­ing Democ­rats into the same posi­tion as Repub­li­cans in 2016 — led by a stan­dard-bear­er who couldn’t com­mand major­i­ty sup­port in his own party.

Luck­i­ly, there’s an easy way to solve this prob­lem, and a num­ber of states are already tak­ing dra­mat­ic action that could change the very nature of our elections.

Six states plan to use ranked choice vot­ing (RCV) for their 2020 Demo­c­ra­t­ic pri­maries or cau­cus­es, includ­ing for all ear­ly vot­ers in Iowa and Neva­da, and all vot­ers in Alas­ka, Hawaii, Kansas and Wyoming. These states will adapt RCV to Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty rules — last-place can­di­dates will be elim­i­nat­ed and back­ers of those can­di­dates will have their vote count toward their next choice until all remain­ing can­di­dates are above the 15 per­cent vote thresh­old to win delegates.

State par­ties made this change because they real­ize allow­ing vot­ers to rank their choic­es — espe­cial­ly in a crowd­ed field that includes many expe­ri­enced and well-fund­ed can­di­dates — makes everyone’s vote more pow­er­ful. RCV has the addi­tion­al advan­tage of putting an end to vote split­ting, the prob­lem of ​“spoil­ers” and even the pos­si­bil­i­ty of a nom­i­nee who lacks major­i­ty sup­port inside the party.

It’s a bold move, and it comes at a time when many pres­i­den­tial can­di­dates includ­ing Bernie Sanders, Eliz­a­beth War­ren, Michael Ben­net, William Weld, Andrew Yang, Seth Moul­ton and Beto O’Rourke have indi­cat­ed they sup­port RCV.

In 2017 and 2018, Maine vot­ers passed and affirmed ranked choice vot­ing in trail­blaz­ing bal­lot mea­sures. RCV saw its first use in guber­na­to­r­i­al pri­maries last spring and in fall con­gres­sion­al races. It made an imme­di­ate impact.

In Maine’s 2nd Dis­trict, incum­bent GOP Rep. Bruce Poliquin fin­ished the first round with a nar­row lead over Demo­c­ra­t­ic chal­lenger Jared Gold­en — but far short of the 50 per­cent nec­es­sary to win. Poliquin earned 46.4 per­cent, com­pared to 45.5 per­cent for Gold­en. Two inde­pen­dents split the remain­ing — and deci­sive — 8 per­cent. Sec­ond-place votes broke toward Gold­en and in the end, he defeat­ed Poliquin by less than 3,000 votes.

In June, after see­ing RCV in action, both cham­bers of the state leg­is­la­ture approved a reform that could begin a polit­i­cal trans­for­ma­tion. The state House and Sen­ate over­whelm­ing­ly adopt­ed ranked choice vot­ing for pres­i­den­tial gen­er­al elec­tions as well. A pro­ce­dur­al issue has so far kept the bill from reach­ing Gov. Janet Mills, but that still can hap­pen in the com­ing months.

What would RCV on the pres­i­den­tial lev­el mean in action? Amer­i­cans could have the pow­er to rank their can­di­date pref­er­ences in order, and no longer would vot­ers have to set­tle for the ​“less­er of two evils,” or com­plain that a third-par­ty can­di­date was some kind of spoiler.

Far more Amer­i­cans cast votes for pres­i­dent in the Novem­ber gen­er­al elec­tion than in par­ty pri­maries. So why shouldn’t gen­er­al elec­tions allow Amer­i­cans the broad­est pos­si­ble choice?

Maine is point­ing the way toward an entire­ly dif­fer­ent future. Dur­ing the con­tro­ver­sial 2000 and 2016 pres­i­den­tial elec­tions, third-par­ty can­di­dates have rep­re­sent­ed the Greens and Lib­er­tar­i­ans, and much of the con­ver­sa­tion has been angry and accusato­ry. Sup­port­ers of third-par­ty can­di­dates have been blamed for elect­ing the major par­ty can­di­date they liked least — i.e. George W. Bush and Don­ald Trump.

Add RCV to the equa­tion, how­ev­er, and it’s an entire­ly dif­fer­ent con­ver­sa­tion. Vot­ers of these third par­ties would be wel­comed rather than alien­at­ed. RCV sim­u­lates an instant runoff if no can­di­date reach­es 50 per­cent of the vote, so if a third-par­ty can­di­date fin­ish­es out of the run­ning, those votes are real­lo­cat­ed to sec­ond choic­es, end­ing any spoil­er effect.

But more impor­tant­ly, it’s easy to imag­ine how Amer­i­cans might get to choose from a rich boun­ty of per­spec­tives in a pres­i­den­tial elec­tion — and with RCV, vot­ers would be able to mag­ni­fy their vote and their voice at pre­cise­ly the moment when most Amer­i­cans go to the polls.

Two of our last five pres­i­dents have tak­en office with­out win­ning the pop­u­lar vote. Four of the last sev­en elect­ed pres­i­dents have failed to earn a plu­ral­i­ty. That’s a key rea­son why our pol­i­tics remains so polar­ized and divi­sive even after an election.

Let’s embrace choice, fair­ness and a tru­ly rep­re­sen­ta­tive democ­ra­cy in which the major­i­ty real­ly rules. Maine has led the way, and now we’re see­ing a slew of states step­ping up in the 2020 pres­i­den­tial race. We shouldn’t be stuck choos­ing the less­er of two evils. Our polit­i­cal debate shouldn’t be stuck in the same frus­trat­ing par­ti­san quick­sand, or the same angry dis­missals of can­di­dates and vot­ers who dare stand out­side the con­ven­tion­al two-par­ty process.

Trust vot­ers. Trust democ­ra­cy. It shouldn’t be that com­pli­cat­ed. And the grow­ing momen­tum behind RCV makes all of this a real possibility.