We need rating, not ranking.
Why rating instead of the choose-one system? Because choose-one gives more power to the major parties and less power to individuals. A rating system such as the four-valued one I propose gives all voters equal power over the outcome. This equality, there is reason to expect that it will at least somewhat decouple the effect of money from elections.
Proposed solution: https://1787regime.wordpress.com/2016/08/12/proposed-abfg-score-voting-system-for-single-winner-elections/
Some of the rationale for why to think such a solution would decouple money from electoral outcomes: http://rangevoting.org/Cash3.html
Ranking and choose-one are both bad because they limit the voter’s expression of the voter’s rating of a candidate depending on what the voter says about other candidates. A fair system has to leave those limitations off, has to permit the voter to rate or grade (not rank) each candidate independently of the other candidates. For example, if I like Nader but prefer Gore to Bush, I vote Nader A, Gore B, and Bush G.
This link explains how the choose-one voting system gives unequal voting power to voters depending on their position regarding the candidacies. http://www.equalvote.co/thestatusisnotquo#linkback2
