This is a good use of a pie chart. Also, please vote
Great visual and message! I’m astonished at how many people don’t vote, *especially* in this very important election!
Does eligible voter refer only to a person that is on the voter roll (registered) or does it also include the person that legally could register but hasn’t and therefore doesn’t vote?
We build accurate models based off of small percentages of the population.
Whilst I think it’s dumb not to vote, I don’t think one party or the other is going to benefit in a massive way.
Obviously voter disenfranchisment is real and incredibly wicked so is gerrymandering. These are bigger problems than just raw votes.
Presumably in those states, most non-voters don’t have a strong preference, or they would have voted.
The parties spend a lot of effort on “people who might not vote, but if they do it’ll be for us”, especially in the close states, so it seems fair to assume most who didn’t vote despite all of that had no strong preference.
it’s bonkers how many people don’t partizipate in democracy
All nonvoters should vote. They should write in “none of the above”
Remember: Vote for the person who has EARNED your vote.
Imagine: Candidate A, on a topic, has the exact opposite opinion on it that you do.
Candidate B, on the same topic, ALSO has the exact opposite opinion on it that you do.
Don’t feel pressure to vote. If a candidate hasn’t EARNED your vote, then don’t vote.
Also, a 3rd party vote is NOT A WASTED VOTE. Vote for the person YOU want to do the job, whose policies and opinions have EARNED your support.
What’s the conclusion here? If people who didn’t vote for my candidate voted then my candidate could have more votes?
They need to make election day a holiday so people can vote
Not from the US, is there a particular reason why Minnesota has such a high participation compared to the others? I’m really curious.
Remember folks: After the election, it’s important to blame that small green sliver of third-party voters for being “spoilers”, and to totally ignore that gigantic gray wedge of non-voters, give those people a pass.
Whatever you do, never blame your chosen candidate for any failure to attract voters in sufficient quantities.
/s
Based on data like this, wouldn’t even a place like California get swung if *just the right* mix of “didn’t vote” voted in just the right way?
The biggest voting block every year is the non voters so doesn’t surprise me.
This is where I point out that studies show that non-voters tend to favor candidates in similar proportions to voters. Everyone likes to think that non-voters will support their side if only they could get them to the polls (especially if they’re the side that’s trailing), but it’s likely that they won’t change the outcome, just the vote totals. It makes sense, since they are part of the same population, like how polls are representative samples.
IDC which team you’re on, damn near a third not voting is wild to me.
If they all voted for a decent other we could end their duopoly
I believe that:
1) Voting should be mandatory
2) Voting should be ranked choice instant runoff
3) There should be a “None of these” option and if it wins, a new election starts over and none of the candidates currently on the ballot are allowed to participate in an election for 1 year for any position.
4) All states should offer early voting for a minimum of one week, and all states should offer mail in voting and ballot drop boxes.
Edit – More:
5) Being convicted of a crime shouldn’t take away your right to vote
6) Even if you’re currently in prison, you should be able to vote
7) If you’re under 18 but you are working and paying taxes, you should be able to register to vote before turning 18
Edit 2 – Even more:
8) Any candidate on any ballot, regardless of the race (e.g. judges, school board, etc) should be required to answer a ballotpedia type survey where everyone is asked the same questions and given space to answer, and these answers are posted publicly on a website so that we know what they’re about
9) In the case of incumbent judges, we should be able to have access to how they have ruled on cases the same way we can see how legislators voted on laws
Texas should be on here. It’s more insane than this. Thought I had read like 60% of texans don’t vote. It’s has some of the lowest voter turnout anywhere.
I wish all voting charts showed “Didn’t vote” instead of just Republican/Democrat.
Did not vote always always wins the election. Especially if you count voting age rather than registered.
i wish either side would use intelligent and honest platforms. both sides try and defame the other side. they both also hide legislation within larger bills using riders, riders often avoid the standard scrutiny and debate that would occur if they were standalone legislation.. and that’s sus. once either side gains some self respect and morals, we can talk 😂.
All this does is show how amazing Minnesota is and forever will be
Texas belongs in this image. In 2020, only 51.3% of eligible voters in Texas actually voted, which ranked worst in the country for voter turnout. Of those that did vote, only 52% voted red (5.8 million) and 47% voted blue (5.2m) with about 10 million eligible voters who didn’t vote at all.
I’m either going to be terrified or slightly less terrified when this is over.
If you do not agree with anyone just vote some fringe third party. If such party gets 5-10% in some states this surely gets the attention of the big ones.
imagine if all the “Didn’t vote” voted for “Other”. Could make 3 parties viable!
Is this voter registration data? I’m hesitant to use that as the universe of actual voters in a state. Probs would be better off using Census data for 18+ year olds.
Also, I’m old with people sitting out of an election if they don’t want to vote. It would be great if more people just felt comfortable not voting.
Just look at a country like Peru where everyone is mandated to vote. It doesn’t help them pick better leaders.
While in theory, this is true, wouldn’t it also be true that those who don’t vote would be equally split between red and blue?
It would be naive to assume that the majority of non voters would vote the opposite, then those who did not vote.
This has always been true.
The media calls them “undecided voters”. Nearly everyone knows who they are voting for, it’s deciding when to go vote.
Elections are determined by turnout.
People don’t understand sampling or math. Where does this idea come from that the “non voters” would somehow alter a vote, instead of just line up with the current percentages for each side?
What’s more, why do you think they’d support your side? Would you really be “pro vote” if you knew the majority of those people would actually vote against you? I doubt it. You clearly believe they would solidify your own political beliefs, which is just silly.
These are unequivocally the two worst candidates every put forth by the two big political parties. It is impossible in good conscience to vote for either of them.
Frankly, I’m sick of a my presidential choices being forced to be either Josef Stalin or Che Guevera.
Any particular reason for including Minnesota when the rest are all swing states?
I think this year will be a record turn out
People forget why trump is supported by so many people. Many people don’t care about politics but they care about costs and pay. You capture that and you’ll win. That’s my big worry this year is we still have a Hilary Clinton politician not a person or the people
I’m relistening to fear and loathing on campaign trail and this is what lost it for the Dems in 72. McGovern killed sit in NH and Wisconsin by a ground game going after lower middle class workers and did amazing. When the party bosses came in after Miami conference his campaign was done for
![How Eligible Voters Who Don't Vote Could Instead Determine the US Election [OC]](https://www.europesays.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/z8g33b8uw2yd1-1920x1024.jpeg)
38 comments
Sources:
1) Election Lab for eligible voter count: [https://election.lab.ufl.edu/voter-turnout/2020-general-election-turnout/](https://election.lab.ufl.edu/voter-turnout/2020-general-election-turnout/)
2) CNN for party vote count: [https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president](https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president)
Tool: Microsoft Excel
My takeaway from this is: duh!
Go vote!
This is a good use of a pie chart. Also, please vote
Great visual and message! I’m astonished at how many people don’t vote, *especially* in this very important election!
Does eligible voter refer only to a person that is on the voter roll (registered) or does it also include the person that legally could register but hasn’t and therefore doesn’t vote?
We build accurate models based off of small percentages of the population.
Whilst I think it’s dumb not to vote, I don’t think one party or the other is going to benefit in a massive way.
Obviously voter disenfranchisment is real and incredibly wicked so is gerrymandering. These are bigger problems than just raw votes.
Presumably in those states, most non-voters don’t have a strong preference, or they would have voted.
The parties spend a lot of effort on “people who might not vote, but if they do it’ll be for us”, especially in the close states, so it seems fair to assume most who didn’t vote despite all of that had no strong preference.
it’s bonkers how many people don’t partizipate in democracy
All nonvoters should vote. They should write in “none of the above”
Remember: Vote for the person who has EARNED your vote.
Imagine: Candidate A, on a topic, has the exact opposite opinion on it that you do.
Candidate B, on the same topic, ALSO has the exact opposite opinion on it that you do.
Don’t feel pressure to vote. If a candidate hasn’t EARNED your vote, then don’t vote.
Also, a 3rd party vote is NOT A WASTED VOTE. Vote for the person YOU want to do the job, whose policies and opinions have EARNED your support.
What’s the conclusion here? If people who didn’t vote for my candidate voted then my candidate could have more votes?
They need to make election day a holiday so people can vote
Not from the US, is there a particular reason why Minnesota has such a high participation compared to the others? I’m really curious.
Remember folks:
After the election, it’s important to blame that small green sliver of third-party voters for being “spoilers”, and to totally ignore that gigantic gray wedge of non-voters, give those people a pass.
Whatever you do, never blame your chosen candidate for any failure to attract voters in sufficient quantities.
/s
Based on data like this, wouldn’t even a place like California get swung if *just the right* mix of “didn’t vote” voted in just the right way?
The biggest voting block every year is the non voters so doesn’t surprise me.
This is where I point out that studies show that non-voters tend to favor candidates in similar proportions to voters. Everyone likes to think that non-voters will support their side if only they could get them to the polls (especially if they’re the side that’s trailing), but it’s likely that they won’t change the outcome, just the vote totals. It makes sense, since they are part of the same population, like how polls are representative samples.
IDC which team you’re on, damn near a third not voting is wild to me.
If they all voted for a decent other we could end their duopoly
I believe that:
1) Voting should be mandatory
2) Voting should be ranked choice instant runoff
3) There should be a “None of these” option and if it wins, a new election starts over and none of the candidates currently on the ballot are allowed to participate in an election for 1 year for any position.
4) All states should offer early voting for a minimum of one week, and all states should offer mail in voting and ballot drop boxes.
Edit – More:
5) Being convicted of a crime shouldn’t take away your right to vote
6) Even if you’re currently in prison, you should be able to vote
7) If you’re under 18 but you are working and paying taxes, you should be able to register to vote before turning 18
Edit 2 – Even more:
8) Any candidate on any ballot, regardless of the race (e.g. judges, school board, etc) should be required to answer a ballotpedia type survey where everyone is asked the same questions and given space to answer, and these answers are posted publicly on a website so that we know what they’re about
9) In the case of incumbent judges, we should be able to have access to how they have ruled on cases the same way we can see how legislators voted on laws
Texas should be on here. It’s more insane than this. Thought I had read like 60% of texans don’t vote. It’s has some of the lowest voter turnout anywhere.
I wish all voting charts showed “Didn’t vote” instead of just Republican/Democrat.
Did not vote always always wins the election. Especially if you count voting age rather than registered.
i wish either side would use intelligent and honest platforms. both sides try and defame the other side. they both also hide legislation within larger bills using riders, riders often avoid the standard scrutiny and debate that would occur if they were standalone legislation.. and that’s sus. once either side gains some self respect and morals, we can talk 😂.
All this does is show how amazing Minnesota is and forever will be
Texas belongs in this image. In 2020, only 51.3% of eligible voters in Texas actually voted, which ranked worst in the country for voter turnout. Of those that did vote, only 52% voted red (5.8 million) and 47% voted blue (5.2m) with about 10 million eligible voters who didn’t vote at all.
I’m either going to be terrified or slightly less terrified when this is over.
If you do not agree with anyone just vote some fringe third party. If such party gets 5-10% in some states this surely gets the attention of the big ones.
imagine if all the “Didn’t vote” voted for “Other”. Could make 3 parties viable!
Is this voter registration data?
I’m hesitant to use that as the universe of actual voters in a state. Probs would be better off using Census data for 18+ year olds.
Also, I’m old with people sitting out of an election if they don’t want to vote. It would be great if more people just felt comfortable not voting.
Just look at a country like Peru where everyone is mandated to vote. It doesn’t help them pick better leaders.
While in theory, this is true, wouldn’t it also be true that those who don’t vote would be equally split between red and blue?
It would be naive to assume that the majority of non voters would vote the opposite, then those who did not vote.
This has always been true.
The media calls them “undecided voters”. Nearly everyone knows who they are voting for, it’s deciding when to go vote.
Elections are determined by turnout.
People don’t understand sampling or math. Where does this idea come from that the “non voters” would somehow alter a vote, instead of just line up with the current percentages for each side?
What’s more, why do you think they’d support your side? Would you really be “pro vote” if you knew the majority of those people would actually vote against you? I doubt it. You clearly believe they would solidify your own political beliefs, which is just silly.
These are unequivocally the two worst candidates every put forth by the two big political parties. It is impossible in good conscience to vote for either of them.
Frankly, I’m sick of a my presidential choices being forced to be either Josef Stalin or Che Guevera.
Any particular reason for including Minnesota when the rest are all swing states?
I think this year will be a record turn out
People forget why trump is supported by so many people. Many people don’t care about politics but they care about costs and pay. You capture that and you’ll win. That’s my big worry this year is we still have a Hilary Clinton politician not a person or the people
I’m relistening to fear and loathing on campaign trail and this is what lost it for the Dems in 72. McGovern killed sit in NH and Wisconsin by a ground game going after lower middle class workers and did amazing. When the party bosses came in after Miami conference his campaign was done for
Comments are closed.