100+ datasets found
  1. Share of electoral and popular votes by each United States president...

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 4, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Share of electoral and popular votes by each United States president 1789-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1034688/share-electoral-popular-votes-each-president-since-1789/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 4, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Every four years in the United States, the electoral college system is used to determine the winner of the presidential election. In this system, each state has a fixed number of electors based on their population size, and (generally speaking) these electors then vote for their candidate with the most popular votes within their state or district. Since 1964, there have been 538 electoral votes available for presidential candidates, who need a minimum of 270 votes to win the election. Because of this system, candidates do not have to win over fifty percent of the popular votes across the country, but just win in enough states to receive a total of 270 electoral college votes. The use of this system is a source of debate in the U.S.; those in favor claim that it prevents candidates from focusing on the interests of urban populations, and must also appeal to smaller and less-populous states, and they say that this system preserves federalism and the two-party system. However, critics argue that this system does not represent the will of the majority of American voters, and that it encourages candidates to disproportionally focus on winning in swing states, where the outcome is more difficult to predict. Popular results From 1789 until 1820, there was no popular vote, and the President was then chosen only by the electors from each state. George Washington was unanimously voted for by the electorate, receiving one hundred percent of the votes in both elections. From 1824, the popular vote has been conducted among American citizens, to help electors decide who to vote for (although the 1824 winner was chosen by the House of Representatives, as no candidate received over fifty percent of electoral votes). Since 1924, the difference in the share of both votes has varied, with several candidates receiving over ninety percent of the electoral votes while only receiving between fifty and sixty percent of the popular vote. The highest difference was for Ronald Reagan in 1980, where he received just 50.4 percent of the popular vote, but 90.9 percent of the electoral votes. Unpopular winners Since 1824, there have been 49 elections, and in 18 of these the winner did not receive over fifty percent of the popular vote. In the majority of these cases, the winner did receive a plurality of the votes, however there have been five instances where the winner of the electoral college vote lost the popular vote to another candidate. The most recent examples of this were in 2000, when George W. Bush received roughly half a million fewer votes than Al Gore, and in 2016, where Hillary Clinton won approximately three million more votes than Donald Trump.

  2. Share of total population who voted in U.S. presidential elections 1824-2020...

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 4, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Share of total population who voted in U.S. presidential elections 1824-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1140011/number-votes-cast-us-presidential-elections/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 4, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    In the 1824 U.S presidential election, which was the first where a popular vote was used to determine the overall winner, approximately three percent of the U.S. population voted in the election, while only one percent actually voted for the winner. Over the following decades, restrictions that prevented non-property owning males from voting were gradually repealed, and almost all white men over the age of 21 could vote by the 1856 election. The next major development was the 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution following the American Civil War, which granted suffrage to all male citizens of voting age, regardless of race. Turnout then grew to almost twenty percent at the turn of the century, however Jim Crow laws played a large part in keeping these numbers lower than they potentially could have been, by disenfranchising black communities in the south and undoing much of the progress made during the Reconstruction Era. Extension of voting rights Female suffrage, granted to women in 1920, was responsible for the largest participation increase between any two elections in U.S. history. Between the 1916 and 1920 elections, overall turnout increased by almost seven percent, and it continued to grow to 38 percent by the 1940 election; largely due to the growth in female participation over time. Following a slight reduction during the Second World War and 1948 elections, turnout remained at between 36 and forty percent from the 1950s until the 1990s. Between these decades, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Twenty-Sixth Amendment in 1971 respectively re-enfranchised many black voters in the south and reduced the voting age in all states from 21 to 18 years old. Participation among female voters has also exceeded male participation in all elections since 1980. Recent trends The 1992 election was the first where more than forty percent of the total population cast ballots, and turnout has been above forty percent in all presidential elections since 2004. Along with the extension of voting rights, the largest impact on voter turnout has been the increase in life expectancy throughout the centuries, almost doubling in the past 150 years. As the overall average age has risen, so too has the share of the total population who are eligible to vote, and older voters have had the highest turnout rates since the 1980s. Another factor is increased political involvement among ethnic minorities; while white voters have traditionally had the highest turnout rates in presidential elections, black voters turnout has exceeded the national average since 2008. Asian and Hispanic voter turnouts have also increased in the past twenty years, with the growing Hispanic vote in southern and border states expected to cause a major shift in U.S. politics in the coming decades.

    In terms of the most popular presidents, in the 1940 election, Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first president to have been elected by more than one fifth of the total population. Three presidents were elected by more than 22 percent of the total population, respectively Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, Richard Nixon in 1972 and Barack Obama in 2008, while Ronald Reagan's re-election in 1984 saw him become the only president in U.S. history to win with the support of more than 23 percent of the total population. While the vote count for the 2020 election is still to be finalized, President-elect Joe Biden has already received 81.28 million votes as of December 02, which would also translate to over 24.5 percent of the total population, and will likely near 25 percent by the end of the counting process.

  3. d

    Voter Registration by Census Tract

    • catalog.data.gov
    • data.kingcounty.gov
    • +1more
    Updated Jun 29, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    data.kingcounty.gov (2025). Voter Registration by Census Tract [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/voter-registration-by-census-tract
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jun 29, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    data.kingcounty.gov
    Description

    This web map displays data from the voter registration database as the percent of registered voters by census tract in King County, Washington. The data for this web map is compiled from King County Elections voter registration data for the years 2013-2019. The total number of registered voters is based on the geo-location of the voter's registered address at the time of the general election for each year. The eligible voting population, age 18 and over, is based on the estimated population increase from the US Census Bureau and the Washington Office of Financial Management and was calculated as a projected 6 percent population increase for the years 2010-2013, 7 percent population increase for the years 2010-2014, 9 percent population increase for the years 2010-2015, 11 percent population increase for the years 2010-2016 & 2017, 14 percent population increase for the years 2010-2018 and 17 percent population increase for the years 2010-2019. The total population 18 and over in 2010 was 1,517,747 in King County, Washington. The percentage of registered voters represents the number of people who are registered to vote as compared to the eligible voting population, age 18 and over. The voter registration data by census tract was grouped into six percentage range estimates: 50% or below, 51-60%, 61-70%, 71-80%, 81-90% and 91% or above with an overall 84 percent registration rate. In the map the lighter colors represent a relatively low percentage range of voter registration and the darker colors represent a relatively high percentage range of voter registration. PDF maps of these data can be viewed at King County Elections downloadable voter registration maps. The 2019 General Election Voter Turnout layer is voter turnout data by historical precinct boundaries for the corresponding year. The data is grouped into six percentage ranges: 0-30%, 31-40%, 41-50% 51-60%, 61-70%, and 71-100%. The lighter colors represent lower turnout and the darker colors represent higher turnout. The King County Demographics Layer is census data for language, income, poverty, race and ethnicity at the census tract level and is based on the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5 year Average provided by the United States Census Bureau. Since the data is based on a survey, they are considered to be estimates and should be used with that understanding. The demographic data sets were developed and are maintained by King County Staff to support the King County Equity and Social Justice program. Other data for this map is located in the King County GIS Spatial Data Catalog, where data is managed by the King County GIS Center, a multi-department enterprise GIS in King County, Washington. King County has nearly 1.3 million registered voters and is the largest jurisdiction in the United States to conduct all elections by mail. In the map you can view the percent of registered voters by census tract, compare registration within political districts, compare registration and demographic data, verify your voter registration or register to vote through a link to the VoteWA, Washington State Online Voter Registration web page.

  4. Number of votes cast in U.S. presidential elections 1824-2020

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 4, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Number of votes cast in U.S. presidential elections 1824-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1139763/number-votes-cast-us-presidential-elections/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 4, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Since 1824, when the popular vote was first used to determine the overall winner in U.S. presidential elections, the share of the population who participate in these elections has gradually increased. Despite this increase, participation has never reached half of the total population; partly due to the share of the population below the voting age of eighteen, but also as many potential voters above the age of eighteen do not take part, or are ineligible to vote. For example, in the 2016 election, approximately twenty million U.S. adults were ineligible to vote, while over 94 million simply did not participate; in this election, Donald Trump won the electoral college with 63 million votes, which means that 19.4 percent of the total U.S. population (or 27.3 percent of eligible voters) voted for the current president.

    Development throughout history

    While the figures for the 2016 election may appear low, over 42 percent of the total population participated in this election, which was the third highest participation rate ever recorded (after the 2008 and 2020 elections). In the first election decided by a popular vote in 1824, only 350 thousand votes were cast from a total population of 10.6 million, although this increased to over four million votes by the 1856 election, as restrictions that applied to non-property holding white males were gradually lifted. Participation levels then dropped during the Civil War and Reconstruction era, as those who lived in Confederate states could not vote in 1864, and many white southerners were restricted or discouraged in the following election. Although universal suffrage was granted to black males in the wake of the Civil War, the majority of black Americans lived in the southern states, where lawmakers introduced Jim Crow laws in the late 1800s to suppress and disenfranchise the black vote, as well as poor white voters.

    The next major milestone was the introduction of women's suffrage in 1920, which saw voter participation increase by seven million votes (or seven percent) between the 1916 and 1920 elections. Between the 1910s and 1970s, the Great Migration saw many black Americans move away from the south to northern and western states, where they faced fewer obstacles when voting and greater economic mobility. This period of black migration began to decline in the 1960s and 1970s, during which time many Jim Crow laws were repealed in the south, through legislation such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Female participation also grew gradually, and has exceeded male voting participation in all elections since the 1980s. The minimum voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in all states in 1971, although this seemingly had a minimal impact on the short-term trajectory of voter participation.

    Recent elections

    The 1992 election was the first in which more than one hundred million votes were cast, which was almost 41 percent of the total population. All elections since 2004 have also had more than one hundred million votes cast, which has again been more than forty percent of the total population. Another key factor in the increase in voter participation is the fact that people are living longer than ever before, and that those aged 65 and over have had the highest turnout levels since 1992. While some figures may be subject to change, the 2020 election set new records for voter turnout. Despite the global coronavirus pandemic, which many thought could cause the lowest turnout in decades, a record number of voters cast their ballots early or by mail, setting a new record of votes just shy of 160 million. In the 2020 election, Joe Biden and Donald Trump received 81.3 million and 74.2 million votes respectively, both beating Barack Obama's previous record of 69.3 million ballots in 2008.

  5. H

    2020 General Election Voting by US Census Block Group

    • dataverse.harvard.edu
    Updated Mar 10, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Michael Bryan (2025). 2020 General Election Voting by US Census Block Group [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NKNWBX
    Explore at:
    CroissantCroissant is a format for machine-learning datasets. Learn more about this at mlcommons.org/croissant.
    Dataset updated
    Mar 10, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Harvard Dataverse
    Authors
    Michael Bryan
    License

    CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau practices "data suppression", filtering some block groups from demographic publication because they do not meet a population threshold. This practice...

  6. Winning margins for votes in U.S. presidential elections 1789-2020

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 4, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Winning margins for votes in U.S. presidential elections 1789-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1035992/winning-margins-us-presidential-elections-since-1789/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 4, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Throughout U.S. history, the difference in the proportion of electoral votes has often been several times larger than the difference in the popular vote. For example, in the 1980s Ronald Reagan received roughly nine and eighteen percent more popular votes than his respective candidates, however he then received roughly seventy percent more electoral votes than both candidates. There are many critics of the electoral college system, whose main argument is that the most popular candidate is not always elected president, while its defenders argue that the system gives proportional representation to all Americans, and prevents candidates from ignoring the interests of those in less-populated states.

    The United States uses the electoral college system to elect its presidents, which generally means that the most popular candidate in each state is then given that state's allocation of electoral votes (based on the state's population). Since 1968, there have been 538 electoral votes on offer in each election, meaning that he first candidate to reach 270 electoral votes is declared President. Since 1824, a popular vote has been held among the general public in order to determine the most popular candidate in each state (although women were not granted suffrage until 1920, while black and Native American voters faced widespread voter suppression until the 1960s). Because of the electoral college system, the proportion of popular votes won by a candidate may be very different than the proportion of electoral votes, and this has caused some instances where the candidate with the most electoral votes is declared President of the United States, despite losing the popular vote (such as in 2000 and 2016).

  7. c

    2012 11: Popular Vote Density Map 2012 Presidential Election Results by...

    • opendata.mtc.ca.gov
    Updated Nov 28, 2012
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    MTC/ABAG (2012). 2012 11: Popular Vote Density Map 2012 Presidential Election Results by County [Dataset]. https://opendata.mtc.ca.gov/documents/9dff27c82bd8468c998675d3268bbf48
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 28, 2012
    Dataset authored and provided by
    MTC/ABAG
    License

    MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    The typical statewide or county-wide red/blue map (shown at left) depicts presidential voting results on a winner-take-all basis, so they award an entire geographical area to the Republican or Democratic candidate no matter how close the actual vote tally The large map in the attachment factors in both the percentage of the popular vote won by each candidate as well as the population density of each county. So, the sparsely populated Great Plains and Rocky Mountain West are shown in a much lighter color than the Eastern Seaboard, and the map as a whole is more purple than either red or blue. Perhaps the United States is less divided than some maps would lead us to believe.

  8. Share of electoral votes for major parties in US presidential elections...

    • statista.com
    Updated Oct 29, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Share of electoral votes for major parties in US presidential elections 1860-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1035442/electoral-votes-republican-democratic-parties-since-1828/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 29, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    With Abraham Lincoln's victory in the 1860 presidential election, the Republican Party cemented its position as one of the two major political parties in the United States. Since 1860, candidates from both parties have faced one another in 41 elections, with the Republican candidate winning 24 elections, to the Democrats' 17. The share of electoral college votes is often very different from the share of the popular vote received by each candidate in the elections, as the popular vote differences tend to be much smaller. Electoral college system In the U.S., the electoral college system is used to elect the president. For most states, this means that the most popular candidate in each state then receives that state's allocation of electoral votes (which is determined by the state's population). In the majority of elections, the margin of electoral votes has been over thirty percent between the two major party candidates, and there were even some cases where the winner received over ninety percent more electoral votes than the runner-up. Biggest winners The largest margins for the Republican Party occurred in the aftermath of the American Civil War, in the pre-Depression era of the 1920s, with Eisenhower after the Second World War, and then again with the Nixon, Reagan, and Bush campaigns in the 1970s and 80s. For the Democratic Party, the largest victories occurred during the First and Second World Wars, and for Lindon B. Johnson and Bill Clinton in the second half of the 20th century. In the past six elections, the results of the electoral college vote have been relatively close, compared with the preceding hundred years; George W. Bush's victories were by less than seven percent, Obama's victories were larger (by around thirty percent), and in the most recent elections involving Donald Trump he both won and lost by roughly 14 percent.

  9. Comparative Socio-Economic, Public Policy, and Political Data,1900-1960

    • icpsr.umich.edu
    ascii, sas, spss
    Updated Jan 12, 2006
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Hofferbert, Richard I. (2006). Comparative Socio-Economic, Public Policy, and Political Data,1900-1960 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR00034.v1
    Explore at:
    spss, sas, asciiAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jan 12, 2006
    Dataset provided by
    Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Researchhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/pages/
    Authors
    Hofferbert, Richard I.
    License

    https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/34/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/34/terms

    Area covered
    Switzerland, Europe, Germany, Mexico, France, Canada
    Description

    This study contains selected demographic, social, economic, public policy, and political comparative data for Switzerland, Canada, France, and Mexico for the decades of 1900-1960. Each dataset presents comparable data at the province or district level for each decade in the period. Various derived measures, such as percentages, ratios, and indices, constitute the bulk of these datasets. Data for Switzerland contain information for all cantons for each decennial year from 1900 to 1960. Variables describe population characteristics, such as the age of men and women, county and commune of origin, ratio of foreigners to Swiss, percentage of the population from other countries such as Germany, Austria and Lichtenstein, Italy, and France, the percentage of the population that were Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, births, deaths, infant mortality rates, persons per household, population density, the percentage of urban and agricultural population, marital status, marriages, divorces, professions, factory workers, and primary, secondary, and university students. Economic variables provide information on the number of corporations, factory workers, economic status, cultivated land, taxation and tax revenues, canton revenues and expenditures, federal subsidies, bankruptcies, bank account deposits, and taxable assets. Additional variables provide political information, such as national referenda returns, party votes cast in National Council elections, and seats in the cantonal legislature held by political groups such as the Peasants, Socialists, Democrats, Catholics, Radicals, and others. Data for Canada provide information for all provinces for the decades 1900-1960 on population characteristics, such as national origin, the net internal migration per 1,000 of native population, population density per square mile, the percentage of owner-occupied dwellings, the percentage of urban population, the percentage of change in population from preceding censuses, the percentage of illiterate population aged 5 years and older, and the median years of schooling. Economic variables provide information on per capita personal income, total provincial revenue and expenditure per capita, the percentage of the labor force employed in manufacturing and in agriculture, the average number of employees per manufacturing establishment, assessed value of real property per capita, the average number of acres per farm, highway and rural road mileage, transportation and communication, the number of telephones per 100 population, and the number of motor vehicles registered per 1,000 population. Additional variables on elections and votes are supplied as well. Data for France provide information for all departements for all legislative elections since 1936, the two presidential elections of 1965 and 1969, and several referenda held in the period since 1958. Social and economic data are provided for the years 1946, 1954, and 1962, while various policy data are presented for the period 1959-1962. Variables provide information on population characteristics, such as the percentages of population by age group, foreign-born, bachelors aged 20 to 59, divorced men aged 25 and older, elementary school students in private schools, elementary school students per million population from 1966 to 1967, the number of persons in household in 1962, infant mortality rates per million births, and the number of priests per 10,000 population in 1946. Economic variables focus on the Gross National Product (GNP), the revenue per capita per household, personal income per capita, income tax, the percentage of active population in industry, construction and public works, transportation, hotels, public administration, and other jobs, the percentage of skilled and unskilled industrial workers, the number of doctors per 10,000 population, the number of agricultural cooperatives in 1946, the average hectares per farm, the percentage of farms cultivated by the owner, tenants, and sharecroppers, the number of workhorses, cows, and oxen per 100 hectares of farmland in 1946, and the percentages of automobiles per 1,000 population, radios per 100 homes, and cinema seats per 1,000 population. Data are also provided on the percentage of Communists (PCF), Socialists, Radical Socialists, Conservatives, Gaullists, Moderates, Poujadists, Independents, Turnouts, and other political groups and p

  10. National Elections Across Democracy and Autocracy

    • kaggle.com
    • data.niaid.nih.gov
    • +1more
    Updated May 6, 2024
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    mFarazF (2024). National Elections Across Democracy and Autocracy [Dataset]. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/mfarazf/nelda-dataset
    Explore at:
    CroissantCroissant is a format for machine-learning datasets. Learn more about this at mlcommons.org/croissant.
    Dataset updated
    May 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Kaggle
    Authors
    mFarazF
    Description

    The National Elections across Democracy and Autocracy (NELDA) dataset provides detailed information on all election events from 1960-2006. To be included, elections must be for a national executive figure, such as a president, or for a national legislative body, such as a parliament, legislature, constituent assembly, or other directly elected representative bodies. In order for an election to be included, voters must directly elect the person or persons appearing on the ballot to the national post in question. Voting must also be direct, or “by the people” in the sense that mass voting takes place. That voting is “by the people” does not imply anything about the extent of the franchise: some regimes may construe this to mean a small portion of the population. However, when voting takes place by committee, institution or a coterie, the “election” is not included. By-elections are not counted as elections for the purpose of this project, unless they take the form of midterm elections occurring within a pre-established schedule. In federal systems, only elections to national-level bodies are included. Cases in which any portion of the seats in a national legislative body are filled through voting are included. Beyond these basic requirements, elections may or may not be competitive, and may have any number of other ostensible flaws. In fact, this last feature of the dataset is what separates NELDA most clearly from other available datasets on elections. (2011)

  11. Electoral statistics for the UK

    • ons.gov.uk
    • cy.ons.gov.uk
    xlsx
    Updated Apr 11, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Office for National Statistics (2024). Electoral statistics for the UK [Dataset]. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/elections/electoralregistration/datasets/electoralstatisticsforuk
    Explore at:
    xlsxAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Apr 11, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Office for National Statisticshttp://www.ons.gov.uk/
    License

    Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    United Kingdom
    Description

    Electoral registrations for parliamentary and local government elections as recorded in electoral registers for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

  12. California's electoral votes in U.S. presidential elections 1852-2024

    • statista.com
    Updated Nov 7, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). California's electoral votes in U.S. presidential elections 1852-2024 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1128983/california-electoral-votes-since-1852/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 7, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    California, United States
    Description

    Since 1852, the U.S. presidential election has been contested in California 44 times, with Californians successfully voting for the winning candidate on 35 occasions, giving an overall success rate of 80 percent. California has awarded the majority of its electoral votes to the Republican Party in 23 elections, the Democratic Party in 20 elections, and the only year when a third-party candidate won a majority was in 1912, where Theodore Roosevelt won the state while campaigning as the Progressive Party's nominee. Between 1952 and 1988, there was only one election that was not won by the Republican candidate, while all elections since 1992 have been won by the Democratic nominee. In the 2024 election, Oakland-born Vice President Kamala Harris ran as the Democratic nominee, and comfortably won her home state but lost the nationwide vote. Californian under-representation? California was admitted to the union in 1850, and was granted just four electoral votes in its first three presidential elections. In the past two centuries, California's population has grown rapidly, largely due to a positive net migration rate from within the U.S. and abroad. Today, it has the highest population of any state in the U.S, with almost forty million people, and has therefore been designated 54 electoral votes; the most of any state. Although California has been allocated around ten percent of the total electoral votes on offer nationwide, The Golden State is home to roughly twelve percent of the total U.S. population, therefore a number closer to 62 electoral votes would be more proportional to the U.S. population distribution. Despite this, California's total allocation was reduced to 54 in the 2024 election. Native Californians As of 2020, Richard Nixon is the only native Californian to have been elected to the presidency, having won the election in 1968 and 1972. California also voted for Nixon in the 1960 election, although John F. Kennedy was the overall winner. Two other U.S. Presidents had declared California as their home state; they were Herbert Hoover, who won the 1928 election, and Ronald Reagan, who won in 1980 and 1984 respectively. While states generally support candidates who were born or reside there, Californian candidates have failed to carry their home state or state of birth in four U.S. presidential elections, these were; John C. Frémont in 1854 (who actually came third in California), Herbert Hoover in 1932, and Adlai Stevenson in both the 1952 and 1956 elections.

  13. Indonesia East Java: Total Electors

    • ceicdata.com
    Updated May 15, 2018
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    CEICdata.com (2018). Indonesia East Java: Total Electors [Dataset]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indonesia/presidential-election-results-of-vote-acquisition-east-java/east-java-total-electors
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 15, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    CEIC Data
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 2009 - Dec 1, 2014
    Area covered
    Indonesia
    Description

    Indonesia East Java: Total Electors data was reported at 30,933,642.000 Person in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 29,864,251.000 Person for 2009. Indonesia East Java: Total Electors data is updated yearly, averaging 30,398,946.500 Person from Dec 2009 (Median) to 2014, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 30,933,642.000 Person in 2014 and a record low of 29,864,251.000 Person in 2009. Indonesia East Java: Total Electors data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by General Elections Commisions. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s General Election – Table ID.GEB016: Presidential Election: Results of Vote Acquisition: East Java.

  14. d

    Canadian Gallup Poll, September 1956, #251

    • search.dataone.org
    • borealisdata.ca
    Updated Mar 28, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Gallup Canada (2024). Canadian Gallup Poll, September 1956, #251 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.5683/SP2/SEI0YQ
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 28, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Borealis
    Authors
    Gallup Canada
    Area covered
    Canada
    Description

    This Gallup poll seeks to collect the opinions of Canadians on a variety of subjects. The main topics of discussion are politics and elections, children, and the average Canadian. In addition, there are several current events topics, with subjects that include income taxes, obesity, and sports. Respondents were also asked questions so that they could be grouped according to geographic, demographic, and social variables. Topics of interest include: the American election; the average Canadian; car ownership; child pampering; donating to a political campaign; drivers license possesion, the Duke of Windsor; the federal election; federal office; government problems; the Grey Cup, opinions on what happiness is; how happy the respondents are; income tax rates; the lifespan of obese people; mandatory military service; whether obese people are more prone to heart attacks; population predictions; preferred political parties; traffic tickets; the Suez Canal dispute; Union membership; voting behaviour; and how world relations are affected by the Olympics. Basic demographics variables are also included.

  15. North Carolina's electoral votes in U.S. presidential elections 1792-2020

    • statista.com
    Updated Aug 21, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). North Carolina's electoral votes in U.S. presidential elections 1792-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1130593/north-carolina-electoral-votes-since-1792/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 21, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    North Carolina, United States
    Description

    The U.S. presidential election has been held in North Carolina on 57 occasions; this was every election except the first, in 1789, and the 1864 election, when North Carolina was a member of the Confederate States of America. North Carolina has awarded all (or at least a majority) of its electoral votes to the nationwide winning candidate in 38 elections, giving a success rate of 67 percent. The "Tar Heel State" has voted for the Democratic nominee in thirty elections, and the Republican nominee in 15; although eleven of these have come in the past 14 elections. Despite North Carolina voting red in most elections since 1968, it has often been seen as a battleground state, with the four most recent popular votes split by fewer than four points. In the 2020 election, North Carolina was on of the closest results nationwide, with Donald Trump winning the popular vote by a one percent margin. North Carolinians in office Two U.S. presidents were born in North Carolina; the first was James K. Polk, who spent the first seven years of his life in the Waxhaws region, and the second was Andrew Johnson, who was born and raised in Raleigh. Coincidentally, both these men would move to Tennessee, where they would establish political careers before ascending to the presidency. Polk also failed to win the election in his state of birth, while Johnson's election (as Abraham Lincoln's vice presidential nominee) was not contested there. Electoral votes Between 1812 and 1840, North Carolina had 15 electoral votes, however this then decreased to just nine votes by the Reconstruction era, as higher net migration rates in other states saw the saw North Carolina's population grow more slowly than the national average. The allocation then rose to 13 votes in the 1930s, and remained at 13 or 14 until 2004, when it then returned to 15. Historically, the majority of North Carolinians have lived in rural areas, although recent decades have seen the population shift to be come more urban or suburban, and grow due to an influx of migrants from Latin America and South or Southeast Asia. In the 2024 election, North Carolina is expected to gain another electoral vote as its population grows faster than the national average, and higher birth rates among urban and foreign-born populations is likely to increase the Democratic Party's voter base in the state.

  16. Indonesia Jambi: Total Electors

    • ceicdata.com
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    CEICdata.com, Indonesia Jambi: Total Electors [Dataset]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indonesia/presidential-election-results-of-vote-acquisition-jambi/jambi-total-electors
    Explore at:
    Dataset provided by
    CEIC Data
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 2009 - Dec 1, 2014
    Area covered
    Indonesia
    Description

    Indonesia Jambi: Total Electors data was reported at 2,525,649.000 Person in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 2,205,967.000 Person for 2009. Indonesia Jambi: Total Electors data is updated yearly, averaging 2,365,808.000 Person from Dec 2009 (Median) to 2014, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,525,649.000 Person in 2014 and a record low of 2,205,967.000 Person in 2009. Indonesia Jambi: Total Electors data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by General Elections Commisions. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s General Election – Table ID.GEB006: Presidential Election: Results of Vote Acquisition: Jambi.

  17. Democratization and Power Resources 1850-2000

    • services.fsd.tuni.fi
    • datacatalogue.cessda.eu
    • +1more
    zip
    Updated Jan 16, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Vanhanen, Tatu (2025). Democratization and Power Resources 1850-2000 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.60686/t-fsd1216
    Explore at:
    zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jan 16, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Finnish Social Science Data Archive
    Authors
    Vanhanen, Tatu
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    This large longitudinal study is the result of professor Tatu Vanhanen's long-term research on democratization and power resources. International scientific community knows this data also by the name "Vanhanen's Index of Power Resources". The data have been collected from several written sources and have been published as appendices of five different books. The books are listed in the section Data sources below. The original sources of the numerical data published in these books have been collected to a separate document containing background information. Vanhanen divides the variables of his dataset into two main groups. The first group consists of Measures of Democracy and includes three variables. The second group is called Measures of Resource Distribution. The variables in the first group (Measures of Democracy) are Competition, Participation and Index of Democratization. The value of Competition is calculated by subtracting the percentage of votes/seats gained by the largest political party in parliamentary elections and/or in presidential (executive) elections from 100%. The Participation variable is an aggregate of the turnout in elections (percentage of the total population who voted in the same election) and the number of referendums. Each national referendum raises the value of Participation by five percentage points and each state referendum by one percentage point for the year of the referendum. The upper limit for both variables is 70%. Index of Democratization is derived by first multiplying the above mentioned variables Competition and Participation and then dividing this product by 100. Six variables are used to measure resource distribution: 1) Urban Population (%) (as a percentage of total population). 2) Non-Agricultural Population (%) (derived by subtracting the percentage of agricultural population from 100%). 3) Number of students: the variable denotes how many students there are in universities and other higher education institutions per 100.000 inhabitants of the country. Two ways are used to calculate the percentage of Students (%): before the year 1988 the value 1000 of the variable Number of students is equivalent to 100% and between the years 1988-1998 the value 5000 of the same variable is equivalent to 100%. 4) Literates (%) (as a percentage of adult population). 5) Family Farms Are (%) (as a percentage of total cultivated area or of total area of holdings). 6) Degree of Decentralization of Non-Agricultural Economic Resources. This variable has been calculated from the 1970s. Three new variables have been derived from the above mentioned six variables. 1) Index of Occupational Diversification is derived by calculating the arithmetic mean of Urban Population and Non-Agricultural Population. 2) Index of Knowledge Distribution is derived by calculating the arithmetic mean of Students and Literates. 3) Index of Distribution of Economic Power Resources is derived by first multiplying the value of Family Farm Area with the percentage of agricultural population. Then the value of Degree of Decentralization of Non-Agricultural Economic Resources is multiplied with the percentage of Non-Agricultural Population. After this these two products are simply added up. Finally two new variables have derived from the above mentioned variables. First derived variable is Index of Power Resources, calculated by multiplying the values of Index of Occupational Diversification, Index of Knowledge Distribution and Index of the Distribution of Economic Power Resources and then dividing the product by 10 000. The second derived variable Mean is the arithmetic mean of the five (from the 1970s six) explanatory variables. This differs from Index of Power Resources in that a low value of any single variable does not reduce the value of Mean to any great extent.

  18. Indonesia Overseas: Total Electors

    • ceicdata.com
    Updated May 15, 2018
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    CEICdata.com (2018). Indonesia Overseas: Total Electors [Dataset]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indonesia/presidential-election-results-of-vote-acquisition-overseas/overseas-total-electors
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 15, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    CEIC Data
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 2009 - Dec 1, 2014
    Area covered
    Indonesia
    Description

    Indonesia Overseas: Total Electors data was reported at 2,101,538.000 Person in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,180,340.000 Person for 2009. Indonesia Overseas: Total Electors data is updated yearly, averaging 1,640,939.000 Person from Dec 2009 (Median) to 2014, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,101,538.000 Person in 2014 and a record low of 1,180,340.000 Person in 2009. Indonesia Overseas: Total Electors data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by General Elections Commisions. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s General Election – Table ID.GEB036: Presidential Election: Results of Vote Acquisition: Overseas.

  19. H

    Replication Data for: A 2 million person, campaign-wide field experiment...

    • dataverse.harvard.edu
    Updated Jun 12, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Minali Aggarwal; Jennifer Allen; Alex Coppock; Dan Frankowski; Solomon Messing; Kelly Zhang; James Barnes; Andrew Beasley; Harry Hantman; Sylvan Zheng (2023). Replication Data for: A 2 million person, campaign-wide field experiment shows how digital advertising affects voter turnout [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HXZQMU
    Explore at:
    CroissantCroissant is a format for machine-learning datasets. Learn more about this at mlcommons.org/croissant.
    Dataset updated
    Jun 12, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    Harvard Dataverse
    Authors
    Minali Aggarwal; Jennifer Allen; Alex Coppock; Dan Frankowski; Solomon Messing; Kelly Zhang; James Barnes; Andrew Beasley; Harry Hantman; Sylvan Zheng
    License

    CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    We present the results of a large, $8.9 million campaign-wide field experiment, conducted among 2 million moderate and low-information “persuadable” voters in five battleground states during the 2020 US Presidential election. Treatment group subjects were exposed to an eight-month-long advertising program delivered via social media, designed to persuade people to vote against Donald Trump and for Joe Biden. We found no evidence the program increased or decreased turnout on average. We find evidence of differential turnout effects by modeled level of Trump support: the campaign increased voting among Biden leaners by 0.4 percentage points (SE: 0.2pp) and decreased voting among Trump leaners by 0.3 percentage points (SE: 0.3pp), for a difference-in-CATES of 0.7 points that is just distinguishable from zero (t(1035571) = −2.09, p = 0.036, DIC = 0.7 points, 95% CI = [−0.014, −0.00]). An important but exploratory finding is that the strongest differential effects appear in early voting data, which may inform future work on early campaigning in a post-COVID electoral environment. Our results indicate that differential mobilization effects of even large digital advertising campaigns in presidential elections are likely to be modest.

  20. Indonesia West Papua: Total Electors

    • ceicdata.com
    Updated Dec 5, 2019
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    CEICdata.com (2019). Indonesia West Papua: Total Electors [Dataset]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indonesia/presidential-election-results-of-vote-acquisition-west-papua/west-papua-total-electors
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 5, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    CEIC Data
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 2009 - Dec 1, 2014
    Area covered
    Indonesia
    Description

    Indonesia West Papua: Total Electors data was reported at 730,426.000 Person in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 575,753.000 Person for 2009. Indonesia West Papua: Total Electors data is updated yearly, averaging 653,089.500 Person from Dec 2009 (Median) to 2014, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 730,426.000 Person in 2014 and a record low of 575,753.000 Person in 2009. Indonesia West Papua: Total Electors data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by General Elections Commisions. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s General Election – Table ID.GEB035: Presidential Election: Results of Vote Acquisition: West Papua.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Statista (2024). Share of electoral and popular votes by each United States president 1789-2020 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1034688/share-electoral-popular-votes-each-president-since-1789/
Organization logo

Share of electoral and popular votes by each United States president 1789-2020

Explore at:
3 scholarly articles cite this dataset (View in Google Scholar)
Dataset updated
Jul 4, 2024
Dataset authored and provided by
Statistahttp://statista.com/
Area covered
United States
Description

Every four years in the United States, the electoral college system is used to determine the winner of the presidential election. In this system, each state has a fixed number of electors based on their population size, and (generally speaking) these electors then vote for their candidate with the most popular votes within their state or district. Since 1964, there have been 538 electoral votes available for presidential candidates, who need a minimum of 270 votes to win the election. Because of this system, candidates do not have to win over fifty percent of the popular votes across the country, but just win in enough states to receive a total of 270 electoral college votes. The use of this system is a source of debate in the U.S.; those in favor claim that it prevents candidates from focusing on the interests of urban populations, and must also appeal to smaller and less-populous states, and they say that this system preserves federalism and the two-party system. However, critics argue that this system does not represent the will of the majority of American voters, and that it encourages candidates to disproportionally focus on winning in swing states, where the outcome is more difficult to predict. Popular results From 1789 until 1820, there was no popular vote, and the President was then chosen only by the electors from each state. George Washington was unanimously voted for by the electorate, receiving one hundred percent of the votes in both elections. From 1824, the popular vote has been conducted among American citizens, to help electors decide who to vote for (although the 1824 winner was chosen by the House of Representatives, as no candidate received over fifty percent of electoral votes). Since 1924, the difference in the share of both votes has varied, with several candidates receiving over ninety percent of the electoral votes while only receiving between fifty and sixty percent of the popular vote. The highest difference was for Ronald Reagan in 1980, where he received just 50.4 percent of the popular vote, but 90.9 percent of the electoral votes. Unpopular winners Since 1824, there have been 49 elections, and in 18 of these the winner did not receive over fifty percent of the popular vote. In the majority of these cases, the winner did receive a plurality of the votes, however there have been five instances where the winner of the electoral college vote lost the popular vote to another candidate. The most recent examples of this were in 2000, when George W. Bush received roughly half a million fewer votes than Al Gore, and in 2016, where Hillary Clinton won approximately three million more votes than Donald Trump.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu