Voter Turnout

Voter turnout has become one of the most complex issues in political science and practical politics. Three problems account for this complexity. The least complex problem is getting accurate data. Counting becomes extremely difficult whenever large numbers are involved, and when ballots come in several forms—machine, punch-card, paper—inaccuracies become inevitable.

The second problem is that there is no universally accepted definition of voter turnout. The most common issues underscore the obvious: voter turnout is the number and percentage of eligible voters who cast ballots in an election; for example, 40 million voters, or 62 percent of the electorate.

The issues can be complex:

• Should voters be considered as having voted if their ballots are judged invalid?
• Should voters be considered as having voted if they intentionally leave their ballots blank, void them as acts of political or personal protest, or write-in candidate blocks with names such as Elvis Presley or Luke Skywalker?
• Should votes or even elections be considered valid if intentional invalidation appears to be organized and/or affects the outcome of the election?
• Should voter turnout be measured by the number of people who show up or mail in their ballots, or should it be measured only by the ballots that count, what is known as the "effective electorate"?

The final problem, interpreting the data, is the most vexatious. Myriad academic and other studies and assessments globally have attempted to understand voter behavior, in particular, and elections, in general. Few unchallenged conclusions have been reached, and these seem to apply only to specific places and situations.

Background

Low voter turnout may signify either complacent satisfaction or cynical apathy. High voter turnout might signify rebellion or endorsement. It all depends. Sometimes the results speak for themselves. But even then, complex questions of voter motivation, behavior, and desires arise.

The vital issue in voter turnout is not how many, but why. And why exists, ultimately, in the mind of the individual. In even the smallest, cleanest election, the chance that an individual’s vote will be decisive or even important is, for practical purposes, zero. But the words decisive and important do not carry the same impact as meaningful. For a voter to vote, even in countries where voting is compulsory (such laws are usually not enforced), there must be some inner motivation.

It is vital to understand who does not vote, and why. The electorate never includes the entire population or even the entire adult population. Convicted felons may be barred from voting, as may people who are mentally incompetent or people who are hereditary aristocrats. In some countries, women or people of color may still be excluded. People physically out of the country on Election Day may also be ineligible.

"Voter suppression" refers to the efforts of private or governmental organizations to convince people, usually eligible voters of color, not to vote. This takes many forms, from threats and acts of violence to bureaucratic game-playing. Other forms of voter suppression include making it difficult for certain people or groups to register or find a polling place; requiring difficult tests, such as on the state constitution; and levying special taxes. "Gerrymandering," or drawing electoral district boundaries to exclude or minimize certain groups, may also fall in this category.

Other people and groups choose not to vote for very specific reasons. They may, for instance, regard voting as legitimizing a political system they find abhorrent. Professional military may be eligible to vote but refrain, citing their desire to serve without regard to politics. Others may decline because of "conscientious apathy." An additional reason for not voting is disgust with the negativity and vulgarity that have come to dominate election campaigns in recent decades. Finally, some may refuse to participate in elections held by dictators or tyrannical one-party states that are typically considered illegitimate.

Overview

If making it hard for people to register and vote deters them, making it easier should increase turnout. For centuries, political parties and other organizations have offered their loyalists election-day services, such as free transportation to the polling place.

Governments also try to ease the burden. Some countries register voters automatically. Others have "motor voter" procedures; people register when they get or renew their drivers’ licenses. Allowing residents as well as absentees to vote by mail has become common. There have also been experiments in voting via the internet, although these have proven unacceptable, mostly for reasons of computer security.

Curiously, however, this is not always the case. For example, during the last decades of the twentieth century; as voting (at least in many democractic countries) became easier, voter turnout either dwindled or stagnated in many Western countries. Drawing on this data, some argue that in order for voting to be meaningful, some personal effort should be required. The argument is not entirely fatuous. One may feel more like a good citizen after, for example, standing in the rain at the polling station line.

Indeed, some hold that the emotional payoffs of voting may be more important than more objective considerations. People may vote for abstract ideological reasons or in support of a party or faction for whom they have strong affinities. Family history may also play a role; a few researchers have even promulgated the idea of a "voting gene" that determines behavior in a family. So far, this theory has not fared well under peer and scientific review.

Other reasons why people may vote include feeling that they are protecting their economic, cultural, or religious interests. They may feel strongly about some single issue. They also may vote beyond self-interest in order to help others whom they perceive to be disadvantaged or oppressed. Pure love or hate for particular candidates may also play a major role.

After the 1980s, voter turnout was largely characterized by stagnant-to-falling numbers and percentages, increased voter apathy and disgust, and growing cynicism and rage. Turnout remained relatively low, between 50 and 57 percent, into the 2010s. However, a number of factors, including increasing political engagement and growing polarization between the Democratic and Republican parties, contributed to high turnout in the 2020 presidential election.

After the results of the US presidential election in November 2020 were finalized, debates and discussions revolving around voting motivation and turnout were brought to the fore, as that election had proven to be a particularly scrutinized, politically divisive, emotionally heightened, and historic election. Some commentators noted factors including that people had seemed to become more engaged, including through the prominence of social media, in racial, social, political, and economic issues during the presidency of Donald Trump beginning in 2017, and that methods such as early voting and mail-in voting were expanded in a large number of states in 2020 due to the public health concerns associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Associated Press announced that, by November 8, the 2020 election had drawn the greatest voter turnout since 1960, with ballots counted up to that point representing 62 percent of eligible voters. (This number was later calculated at 66 percent.) While Democratic candidate Joe Biden, declared the winner on November 7, had secured over 75 million votes, a historically large amount, Trump had also obtained more than 70 million, which was reported as the most that a defeated candidate had ever received. In part due to continued political polarization, voter turnout remained relatively high in the 2024 presidential election, with approximately 63 percent of eligible voters turning out for the election.

Bibliography

Armstrong, Martin. "How Voter Turnout Varies Around the World." Statista, 11 Apr. 2022, www.statista.com/chart/15996/share-of-the-voting-age-population-that-voted-in-the-most-recent-national-election/. Accessed 19 Jan. 2023.

Choi. Charles Q. "The Genetics of Politics." Scientific American, November 2007.

Fowler, James H. "Altruism and Turnout." Journal of Politics, August 2006.

Fowler, James H. Mandates, Parties and Voters: How Elections Shape the Future. Temple UP, 2007.

Green, Donald P., and Alan S. Gerber. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout. Brookings Institution Press, 2015.

Hersh, Eitan D. Hacking the Electorate: How Campaigns Perceive Voters. Cambridge UP, 2015.

Kronenbergy, Alan. "How Many People Didn't Vote in the 2024 Election?" US News and World Report, 15 Nov. 2024, www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-15/how-many-people-didnt-vote-in-the-2024-election. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Leighley, Jan E., and Jonathan Nagler. Who Votes Now? Demographics, Issues, Inequality and Turnout in the United States. Princeton UP, 2013.

Lewis-Beck, Michael S., et al. The American Voter Revisited. U of Michigan P, 2008.

Riccardi, Nicholas. "Referendum on Trump Shatters Turnout Records." Associated Press, 9 Nov. 2020, apnews.com/article/referendum-on-trump-shatter-voter-record-c5c61a8d280123a1d340a3f633077800. Accessed 9 Nov. 2020.

Potts, Monica. "Turnout Was High Again. Is This The New Normal?" FiveThirtyEight, 15 Nov. 2022, fivethirtyeight.com/features/turnout-was-high-again-is-this-the-new-normal/. Accessed 19 Jan. 2023.

Rolfe, Meredith. Voter Turnout: A Social Theory of Political Participation. Cambridge UP, 2013.