We have just endorsed independent Bob Chew for the United States Senate from Colorado.
That creates an obvious complication.
Colorado will elect its senator by plurality: the candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority. A vote for Chew therefore cannot later transfer to Democratic incumbent John Hickenlooper or Republican Mark Baisley if Chew finishes third.
Where is ranked-choice voting when you need it?
We have just seen the advantage of that system in Alaska. There, voters can rank their genuine first choice while still expressing a preference between the candidates most likely to survive to the final round. Colorado voters do not have that luxury. Colorado voters considered exactly this reform in 2024 and rejected it—and now the Chew race provides a concrete illustration of the problem the reform was intended to solve.
The spoiler problem is real. But the usual solution—never vote for an independent because the independent might spoil the election—creates its own circular logic. Independents cannot become viable because voters are afraid to support them, and voters are afraid to support them because they are not viable.
In Chew’s case, we also do not know whom he hurts more. He is a former Republican with fiscally conservative and market-oriented views that could attract moderate Republicans and independents uncomfortable with Baisley. But his support for Ukraine, opposition to Trump and institutional moderation could also attract Hickenlooper voters. There is not yet useful three-way polling that answers the question.
Colorado currently appears strongly Democratic, which reduces—but certainly does not eliminate—the risk of Chew aiding the election of Baisley. If ranked choice voting was available in Colorado our recommended ranking would be: 1) Chew, 2) Hickenlooper, and 3) Baisley.
We considered that risk and endorsed Chew anyway. An independent candidacy has to be allowed to begin somewhere, particularly when the candidate offers both serious policy ideas and a potentially important institutional strategy for independent senators.
Still, the awkwardness of the choice makes the case for election reform better than almost anything we could write about it.
Ranked-choice voting would let Coloradans vote for the candidate they actually prefer without surrendering their say over the ultimate choice between the remaining candidates.
Unfortunately, not this year.
Read our full endorsement of Bob Chew
