• danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it makes you feel any better, the trend looks like more people are voting as time goes on.

      • theangryseal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As crazy as it is, Donald Trump appears to have been the single largest motivator to vote in American history. Either him or Covid.

        He has definitely motivated me to vote twice, and for the rest of my life I won’t miss an election. Seriously. I had voted before, but I’d sit it out if I was too busy or I didn’t particularly like either candidate.

        I have happily voted for Mr. or Ms. Not Trump twice. Now I also have to vote for Mr or Ms Not Influenced by Trump every chance I get too.

  • Vlixz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe a really dumb question and I’m not from the US but why did Hilary lose in 2016 when she had more votes than Donald Trump? That doesn’t really make any sense to me

  • ownsauce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Should split this out by electoral college votes/states where the ‘did not vote’ could actually have made a difference. This is great info but also a bit misleading cause votes in swing states have more of an effect than increasing votes in deeply blue or deeply red states. The US president is not selected by a national popular vote. See on the chart how W Bush won the election but Gore had the popular vote, due to how the electoral college works.

    Not discounting that more people should vote. I wish there were a national holiday in the US for everyone to get out and vote. But some votes matter more than others, depending on where you live, and this chart misses that nuance.

    • Bumblefumble@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      W Bush didn’t win the election due to how the electoral college works, he won it due to the corrupt supreme court. Not only did he lose the popular vote, he lost the EC as well.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty much. My domicile is in one of the polarized States & the mail-in ballot costs $15 to send. It would be a waste of my money to send a ballot & since I don’t live there I have moral issues voting in elections for places I am out of touch with—leaving just federal content of the ballot.

      • B0rax@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wait. Mail-in ballot costs money in the US? In other countries this is free.

        • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ludicrous shit

          And even then 15$!!?! How much does it cost to send a regular letter there? Because that’s at most how much it should cost to vote by mail. (But it’s it should 1000% be free)

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, and some of the biggest states (like California) solidly go for one party. So, the non-voters really don’t affect the presidential race there.

    • meeeeetch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They usually justify it by saying it’s to prevent the tyranny of the majority (two wolves and a sheep biting on dinner).

      But a case could be made that it’s a way to keep the elite entrenched.

    • Triasha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The founders were a gentleman’s club. Which is basically a fraternity. They made up rules that made sense to a bunch of frat boy farmers with enlightenment libraries.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t call them farmers. Partly because a variety of wealthy professions were represented and mostly because the ones who called themselves farmers didn’t do any farming, they forced enslaved people to farm for them.

  • fermionsnotbosons@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would also like to see a similar graph for mid-term elections. Do the winners even get 10% of the eligible votes?