How Vote Splitting Handed Trump the 2016 Nomination
The majority of Republican voters preferred someone else. But pick-one voting let a minority winner take the whole race. Here’s exactly how it happened—and how approval voting would have changed the outcome.
A Minority Winner in a Majority’s Race
Trump won the nomination with less support than the combined opposition. The math tells the story.
2016 Republican Primary
all primary states
Kasich & Rubio alone
primary votes cast
The core problem: When 17 candidates compete under pick-one voting, the opposition majority splits its support across multiple similar alternatives. A candidate with intense minority support—even 30–40% of the vote—can win state after state while the majority fractures.
One Plurality Winner. Sixteen Split Alternatives.
Trump never needed a majority. He just needed everyone else to divide the rest.
Winning Without a Majority
Trump’s early victories came with pluralities—often well under 50%—while the non-Trump majority split across multiple candidates.
The pattern is clear: In state after state, a combined majority of Republican voters chose someone other than Trump. But because they were forced to pick just one candidate under the pick-one system, their votes scattered. Trump’s concentrated minority support was enough to win.
What Happened When Voters Got a Direct Choice
Polls that tested one-on-one matchups told a completely different story. Without vote splitting, Trump lost.
Trump vs. Cruz
Trump vs. Rubio
Trump vs. Rubio (2nd poll)
The takeaway: When the choice was simplified to just two candidates—removing the vote-splitting problem—Republican voters preferred someone other than Trump. The plurality system didn’t reveal voter preferences. It distorted them.
What If Voters Could Support Multiple Candidates?
FairVote simulated alternative voting on Super Tuesday. Without vote splitting, 9 of 11 states would have flipped away from Trump.
Under pick-one voting, Trump won 7 of 11 Super Tuesday states—mostly with pluralities.
How Approval Voting Eliminates Vote Splitting
Instead of picking just one, voters approve of every candidate they find acceptable. The candidate with the broadest support wins.
Pick-One Problem
Forced to choose one candidate, similar alternatives split the majority vote
Approval Voting Fix
Approve as many as you want. No more “spoilers.” No more splitting.
Broadest Support Wins
Candidates must earn widespread appeal, not just consolidate a narrow base
In 2016, a voter who liked both Rubio and Kasich was forced to choose one, splitting the moderate vote. Under approval voting, that voter could support both—and their combined support would have easily outweighed Trump’s narrow plurality.
The system didn’t fail because voters made bad choices. It failed because the rules forced them into an impossible one.
With an open primary and approval voting in the general election, the 2016 story would have been completely different. Candidates who build the broadest coalitions win. Vote splitting disappears. And the majority actually gets to decide.
Learn More at Fortify DemocracySources
- FairVote — Simulating Instant Runoff Flips Most Donald Trump Primary Victories
- ScienceDirect — Trump, Condorcet and Borda: Voting paradoxes in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries
- The Center for Election Science — Would JD Vance Have Won an Approval Voting Primary?
- NBC News / Wall Street Journal — Republican Primary Head-to-Head Poll, February 2016
- ABC News / Washington Post — Republican Primary Head-to-Head Poll, March 3–6, 2016
- Wikipedia — Results of the 2016 Republican Party presidential primaries