|
| ▲ | Perenti 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Everybody 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 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | In 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. |
|
|
| ▲ | nntwozz 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. The general election in 2022 had 84,2% of eligible voters in Sweden. |
| |
|
| ▲ | pesus 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Plurality, not majority. It may be pedantic but it's an important difference. |
| |
| ▲ | rafram 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | I 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. |
|
|
| ▲ | mpesce 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We regularly have 92% - 93% participation in federal elections here in Australia. Having one next weekend, and already record numbers of pre-poll votes. |
| |
| ▲ | chaboud 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s almost like elections are held on Saturdays and participation is compulsory. Almost… | |
| ▲ | Perenti 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And those that don't vote have to show a very good reason, or pay a fine, or face gaol. | | |
| ▲ | grues-dinner 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Correction: 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 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Must be the sausages |
|
|
| ▲ | CalRobert 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Under fifty percent for what it’s worth. And there was a lot of disenfranchisement |
|
| ▲ | bagels 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not majority, under 50% |
|
| ▲ | mulmen 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There’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. |
| |
| ▲ | A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | << It’s easy to blame people for not voting if you ignore the real difficulties in actually casting a vote for many Americans. I hesitated while reading this part, because I wholly agreed with the first 2 sentences. Do you mean physically difficult in terms of barriers to voting or making a less direct comment about the usefulness of that vote? If the former, I think I disagree compared to other countries ( and the levels of paperwork needed ). If the latter, I would be interested to hear some specifics. | | |
| ▲ | mulmen 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Physically more difficult. Purging voter rolls. Moving polling locations. Voter ID requirements. Restrictions on mail in ballots. Etc. | | |
| ▲ | A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I willing to give you moving polling locations, but with that minor concession. Can you explain to me like I am 5 why those are bad things? For a simple person like myself, one would think, data accuracy, voting system integrity, and verifiability would be of use and value to everyone. |
|
| |
| ▲ | sgc 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That an enormous sample size. Statistically a complete participation should be very close, so the burden of proof lies with those who claim it would be different. Regardless of whether Trump would have won or not, that is a clear indication of evenly split public sentiment. So we still get to justly reap the fruits of our collective choices. There is no exoneration by whimsically dreaming of improbable alternatives. I don't think it is was that hard to vote. That is a straw man to avoid facing the hard truth of American apathy. Now next election, perhaps we can have a conversation on that point. Things a trending rather poorly right now. | | |
| ▲ | jzb 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "I don't think it is that hard to vote" Says a person commenting on HN that almost certainly isn't in a demographic that it has been made intentionally difficult to register, stay registered, and get time off an hourly job to stand in line for hours to vote. | | |
| ▲ | sgc 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I did not say 'is', I said 'was'. I have not seen studies or even many anecdotal stories indicating people think it was too hard for they themselves to vote. I have seen a lot of people saying that about other people, but as of 2024, attempts to disenfranchise voters had not been very well done. I also don't think having ID is a high bar, which is what a large amount of the noise has been about. Many, many democratic countries have this requirement [1]. Coupled with other things it can become a problem, but when anybody says voter id itself is a problem, I can't take them very seriously. I however repeat, that was last year. Things could very well take a dramatic turn for the worse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_identification_laws |
| |
| ▲ | ellen364 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The electorate self-selected into voters and non-voters, it wasn't a random sample. Some chose to go to the polls and some chose to stay at home. Voter preferences don't say a lot about the preferences of non-voters, who've already shown they choose differently. | | |
| ▲ | sgc 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It shouldn't be that hard for you to show some evidence things would be different then. There is nothing indicating a stronger preference to vote has anything at all to do with which direction you lean. More and less does not equal right and left, so the burden of proof is on those who claim it is relevant. Yet polling indicates things would have gone pretty much just as they went. | |
| ▲ | mulmen 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There’s also one party that disproportionately targets specific voter demographics for suppression. |
|
| |
| ▲ | rayiner 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | In 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-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=10909062... | | |
| ▲ | mulmen 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is very interesting but how would turnout and choice change if historically disenfranchised and suppressed communities had equal access to the polls? | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | rayiner 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Arguments 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. |
|
| ▲ | Narkov 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Australia has entered the chat. |
| |
| ▲ | crabmusket 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | For reference, informal votes were around 5% in our last federal election: 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-p... | |
| ▲ | extra88 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You can't bring them up without including that voting is compulsory there. | | |
| ▲ | crabmusket 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | See my sibling comment. Getting your name checked off is compulsory but nothing stops you from handing in a blank ballot. | | |
| ▲ | extra88 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | For 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. | |
| ▲ | swat535 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why would you hand blank ballot at. That point? You might as well vote. | | |
| ▲ | aloha2436 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | "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. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | Someone 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > 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_presidentia...) More importantly, I think quite a few who voted for Trump didn’t vote for this extreme version of Trump. |
|
| ▲ | akio 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The 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. |
