As a Democrat I'm all for whatever helps Democrats flip/hold this seat, but what is the point of implementing the top-four RCV if candidates are just going to drop out strategically? Obviously understand the two-party system prioritizes victory at any cost, but are we not even going to let the system play out even once?
Honestly I like the new system used in Alaska. I'd also argue that the dropping out was not strategical or at least did not strategically benefit any party. Sweeney dropped out, because there was not any chance for her with her disappointing result to get out of fourth place. Gross also probably realized there was not a way to get ahead for him, as he only placed barely above Peltola. And he probably knew that Democrats would rally around Peltola, because iirc he had some trouble with the Alaska Democratic Party. Anyway, it was always either him or Peltola in the top 2 after one of them was eliminated.
I also think the top 4 system is better than the system used in Maine, because it also allows more moderate politicians of the two major parties like for example Murkowski make the general election. Third parties in the US are historically very weak, so we will most likely see multiple Dems or Reps of different party factions make the top 4. But it still gives third parties a chance, if they can coalesce enough voters to make the top 4. Otherwise, they would have most likely been eliminated before the Republican and Democrat candidate anyway.
Having all candidates only run in a general can be a mess, if 10 or even 20 candidates run. Besides counting being difficult, it is very difficult for voters. There is no way the average voter can rank them all or even remember, who those candidates are. The number of 4 is a bit arbitrary, could also be 5 or 6 I guess. But it is very unlikely that someone placing fifth or lower can win the general anyway. In most cases 10% will be enough to qualify. Although Peltola may very well win the special election, only placing fourth in the primary.
