Reality: Campaigns in places using IRV have become more positive

IRV does not eliminate negative campaigning altogether, but based on the experience in cities using IRV to date in San Francisco, Burlington, Aspen and now Minneapolis, there is a great deal of anecdotal evidence that IRV leads to more civil campaign tactics and substantive discourse.

This is because under IRV, more candidates compete in the decisive general election, reducing the number of head-to-head campaigns where negative campaigning can be effective in winning votes.

Under IRV in multiple-candidate races, candidates have a new incentive to both differentiate themselves from other candidates while also appealing to supporters of other candidates.  Negative attacks can be counter-productive and penalize offending candidates at the polls. For this reason, IRV encourages more positive, substantive campaigns in which candidates try to earn first-choice support while remaining attractive to other candidates’ supporters.

Here has been the experience to date in cities using IRV:

San Francisco

The change in the nature of campaigning during the first use of IRV elections in San Francisco in 2004 was noticeable enough to merit a headline in the New York Times: "New Runoff System in San Francisco Has the Rival Candidates Cooperating".  More recently, in a 2008 race, the editor of the San Francisco Bay Guardian wrote that in the highly contested open seat race for the Board of Supervisors:

[The winner] will probably be the one who gets the most second-place [rankings]. So it's in everyone's interest not to go negative. If Sanchez, say, started to attack Quezada, the Quezada backers would get mad and leave Sanchez off their ballots — and that would hurt Sanchez when the second-place votes are counted. So everyone has been pretty well behaved in [District 9]. I've heard a few whispers here and there, and a few people have tossed off a few nasty comments, but overall the candidates and their supporters recognize that it's better to stay positive.

Burlington

A similar dynamic occurred in the highly competitive 2009 mayoral race in Burlington.

The Burlington election certainly was a model of clean, open debate. Democratic city councilor Bill Keogh, a past skeptic of IRV, told the local daily newspaper, “This campaign has been very, very good.” The four leading candidates had been “as forthright as they can be with their views,” he said. “This is the most respectful and informative campaign in Burlington in a long time.”

Aspen

The Aspen Times commented after the 2009 Aspen city election that: "[We] have been impressed with the professionalism displayed…[C]andidates have treated each other respectfully during these stressful times.”

Minneapolis

In Minneapolis, the usually highly contentious 5th ward council race has taken on a very different tone this year. Candidates are engaging in less personal attacks and staying more focused on the issues. According to the the Minnesota Indendent:

Ward Five has a history of poisonous politics. The contest four years ago got particularly acrimonious, with Samuels being parodied as an Uncle Tom. And there have been some signs that the race will not be without fireworks this year.

Despite some heated rhetoric, the incumbent believes that the specter of instant-runoff voting, in which candidates will rank their favored candidates, has had a cleansing affect on the race so far.

“I think it’s much less stressful this year,” he says. “There’s a lot less personal attacking going on.”

In Ward 6, a similar dynamic is taking place:

Given the slim margin of victory four years ago, it’s not particularly surprising that numerous candidates are eying Lilligren’s post this election cycle. The Democrat has attracted five challengers ­ more than any other incumbent in the city. The introduction of instant-runoff voting, in which voters will rank their preferred candidate, further complicates matters.

Lilligren was a strong supporter of adopting ranked-choice voting. He’s visited Cambridge, Mass., where they’ve long utilized such a system, and believes it encourages more constructive, issue-oriented campaigns.

“It’s a much more collegial, positive campaign environment,” he says. “I just think it’s better for the city if council candidates aren’t clawing each other apart.”
“Three of Lilligrens challengers ­ Andy Exley, Laura Jean and Michael Tupper ­ have come up with a unique strategy: they’re campaigning together. The three candidates have been holding shared meet-and-greet events and are refraining from criticizing each other.

Also, see KSTP news report on the Ward 6 race.