• LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      22% of Americans voted for Trump. 78% did not. I can tell you I voted and was offered to answer none of those questions from that site. So I’m going to say none of them represent all of the voters if you don’t actually ask all of the voters.

      Just for the sake of more information: 337m Percentage over 18 ~78% That makes about 262m voters possible. 74m vote for Trump makes 28-29% of possible votes in 2024 81m votes for Biden in 2020, population was around 331m then. About 31-32% of the possibilible votes.

      Point being, people need to vote. Making voting easier makes it possible to ensure you get a more complete tally of what people want in a democracy. People shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to say they won’t be in town, and will be working or w.e else to convince someone that a mail in ballot is wanted.
      Should have a request a ballot button online as well. Why mail a form in to have the forms sent to you. Gets rid of some waste there too.

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Uhh… 335 million Americans, 260 million voting age Americans. With 63% turnout.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        22% of Americans voted for Trump. 78% did not.

        and what, 40% of those didn’t vote at all? How many people here voted for kamala 20%? 21%? Man you aren’t very good at statistics.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          That data was irrelevant to the premise. I could also have listed how many men, women, and chariots voted, but it really doesn’t do anything more than show that if there is a 2 party system, it would be nice to have the winner near 50%. Id like to see everyone vote.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            so why did you even bring up the data lmao? Just make the argument without it.

            I’d also like to see more people vote, but i think we’re probably our own biggest obstacle here lmao.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        People want to vote. Give them a candidate and party worth voting for.

        Abstaining from a broken system is a protest in itself. How else would we know how broken the system was if people weren’t allowed to withhold their vote from all candidates.

        • flashgnash@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          There’s abstaining and there’s not being bothered to vote

          If the object is to send the message that the current options aren’t good enough at least in the UK we vote for parties other than the main two (green and reform for example)

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m not saying to force everyone to vote. But if mandatory voting was a thing I’d say put a new candidates opinion in, and if it gets over 50% of the popular vote, all new candidates required would be an interesting change. Probably has holes, but what the hell, I’ll try anything rather than this 2 party money fueled government we have now

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          People can write in a name. That’s a protest vote, and one that should be fine in a mandatory voting system as seen in literally all the places it is.

          A good candidate would be a great idea to help deal with apathy from a difficult to vote in system but making it easier would also be a huge step up.

          Both things are needed and I wish could be done in any order. But not voting at all is definitely the goal of one side more than the other.