4 ms·
The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civi
by rchaud 2y ago
The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.
- pesus 2y agoPlurality, not majority. It may be pedantic but it's an important difference.
- rafram 2y agoI was going to say that it was a majority this time, but it seems like the results shifted as more votes were counted after election night, and he ended up with 49.8%. Still, unbelievably, pretty close to a majority.
- khazhoux 2y agoI don’t think it’s important in the slightest. Fact is that they were exactly two competitive candidates, and of all the people that cared to vote, more voted for one than the other. It may not be technical majority, but this is the common understanding in this country of “majority rule.”
- Narkov 2y ago> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Australia has entered the chat.
- extra88 2y agoYou can't bring them up without including that voting is compulsory there.
- crabmusket 2y agoSee my sibling comment. Getting your name checked off is compulsory but nothing stops you from handing in a blank ballot.
- swat535 2y agoWhy would you hand blank ballot at. That point? You might as well vote.
- aloha2436 2y ago"I don't like any of the rat-bastards." "I don't care." "I think it's funnier to draw a dick. (And I don't care.)" "I trust other people to make the right choice." "I refuse to participate in this bourgeois sham election." ...are all reasons I've heard, even if I don't actually understand any of them.
- extra88 2y agoFor the purposes of this comparison, those "informal" votes still count in the typically used participation statistics. Voters intentionally case "wasted" ballots in other countries too.
- crabmusket 2y agoFor reference, informal votes were around 5% in our last federal election: https://results.aec.gov.au/27966/website/HouseInformalByState-27966.htm https://results.aec.gov.au/27966/website/HouseInformalByStat... This article contains a fun breakdown of the types of informal votes including a category for "the usual anatomical drawings" (0.7% of informal votes): https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/04/22/2025-federal-election-peter-dutton-dickson-informal-votes/ https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/04/22/2025-federal-election-p...
- akio 2y agoThe majority did not vote for Trump, and I question how many of the minority that did vote for him voted for this, specifically. Almost certainly not all of them, given his approval rating is now well below his popular vote share.
- nntwozz 2y ago> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. The general election in 2022 had 84,2% of eligible voters in Sweden.
- riffraff 2y agoItaly had 64% for the parliamentary elections in 2022, which is the lowest ever but it's pretty far from 30%.
- pokot0 2y agojust to note that if “30% voted for this” participation was roughly 60%
- wahern 2y ago63.9% per https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers Which apparently was quite high. Only 3 presidential elections in the past 100 years exceeded 63%: 1960, 2020, and 2024.
- cscurmudgeon 2y ago[dead]
- mulmen 2y agoThere’s also no evidence that increased turnout would have had the same result. What seems to be overlooked in these conversations is the skill with which American voters have been disenfranchised by partisan forces. It’s easy to blame people for not voting if you ignore the real difficulties in actually casting a vote for many Americans.
- rayiner 2y agoIn fact there was an extensive analysis of the election by Democrat pollster David Shor, who found that 100% turnout would have resulted in an even larger Trump win, by 4.8 points: https://www.vox.com/politics/403364/tik-tok-young-voters-2024-election-democrats-david-shor https://www.vox.com/politics/403364/tik-tok-young-voters-202... This has been the pattern for awhile now. The pool of politically unengaged people are especially Trumpy compared to regular voters: https://abcnews.go.com/538/vote-back-trump/story?id=109090626 https://abcnews.go.com/538/vote-back-trump/story?id=10909062...
- mulmen 2y agoThis is very interesting but how would turnout and choice change if historically disenfranchised and suppressed communities had equal access to the polls?
- selfselfgo 2y ago[dead]
- sgc 2y ago
- bagels 2y agoNot majority, under 50%
- rayiner 2y agoArguments based on voter participation overlook that voting is a statistical sample of the population. The people who don’t vote broadly break down roughly the same way as the people who do vote. And even to the extent they don’t, it’s risky to make assumptions about how they would have voted. If you can generalize about non-voters, it’s that they’re broadly more anti-institution than voters—which is what causes them to put less stock in the institutional practice of voting. In the U.S. in the Trump era, that has meant that non-voters or infrequent voters support Trump somewhat more strongly than regular voters.
- mpesce 2y agoWe regularly have 92% - 93% participation in federal elections here in Australia. Having one next weekend, and already record numbers of pre-poll votes.
- Perenti 2y agoAnd those that don't vote have to show a very good reason, or pay a fine, or face gaol.
- grues-dinner 2y agoCorrection: those that don't enter a polling station. What you do in there is up to you. You can cast a vote, spoil the ballot, cast a "donkey vote" (numbering the options in the order printed), leave the ballot empty, as long as it goes in the box.
- CalRobert 2y agoMust be the sausages
- chaboud 2y agoIt’s almost like elections are held on Saturdays and participation is compulsory. Almost…
- Perenti 2y agoEverybody votes in Australia (not sure how rich, but in top 20 for sure). If you don't you have to show cause or pay a AUD$50 fine. I know some think this is anti-freedom, but it does prevent farces like the current USA. Historically there have been problems in the past (30 years ago) but these days the Australian Electoral Commission (Independent from government) revise electoral boundaries to ensure no more gerrymanders.
- tmtvl 2y agoIn Belgium attendance is mandatory as well. I think it's a positive as it means complacency ("my side has already won, no reason to go out and vote") is never a factor in the outcome.
- drowsspa 2y agoIn Brazil as well. I think a good side effect, or perhaps the main intended one, is that governments aren't allowed to supress voters and have to make sure everyone has easy access to the voting booths. Every election there are mandatory pieces on TV about how people are voting even in the most remote of places.
- rchaud 2y agoFarces occur in the US because it has a 2-party system where the winner takes all, and there is no limit to political funding. In parliamentary systems common in the rest of the West, there is at least a pretence of inter-party cooperations, e.g. forming coalitions to contain the power of the party with the plurality (but not majority) of votes.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- CalRobert 2y agoUnder fifty percent for what it’s worth. And there was a lot of disenfranchisement
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Someone 2y ago> The majority that did vote, voted for this Nitpick: Trump got less than 50% of the votes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Electoral_results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia...) More importantly, I think quite a few who voted for Trump didn’t vote for this extreme version of Trump.