A survey conducted in July 2025 found that the most important issue for ***percent of Americans was inflation and prices. A further ***percent of respondents were most concerned about jobs and the economy.

According to a survey from late December 2024, the two most important issues among Republican voters in the United States were inflation and immigration, with ** and ** percent ranking it their primary political concerns respectively. In contrast, only *** percent of Democrats considered immigration their most important issue. Inflation and healthcare were the leading issues among democrats in the U.S.

When considering who to vote for in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election, the economy was the most important issue for more than half of Republicans, compared to only 14 percent of Democrats. Preserving democracy was the most important issue among Democrats when deciding who to vote for.

The week before the 2022 midterm election, at least ** percent of people in the United States felt that inflation, jobs & the economy, and healthcare, and national security were very important issues leading up to the 2022 midterm elections. Climate and the environment was rated as being one of the least important issues for Americans and American voters.

This special topic poll, conducted October 19-22, 2006, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the current presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way George W. Bush was handling his job as president, whether they approved of the way Congress and their own representative in Congress was handling their job, and to rate the condition of the national economy. Registered voters were asked whether they followed the congressional elections, whether they were likely to vote, and which candidate they would vote for if the election were being held that day. Registered voters who had already voted absentee were asked which candidate they voted for, how enthusiastic they were about their vote, and whether their vote was more for one political party, or more against the other political party. Opinions were solicited on what was the most important issue in congressional elections, whether things in the country were generally going in the right direction, whether their reason for voting for a candidate for Congress included showing support for George W. Bush, which political party they trusted to do a better job handling issues such as the situation in Iraq and the economy, and whether they thought a change of control from the Republicans to the Democrats would be a good thing. Information was collected on whether respondents had been contacted by any organization working in support of a candidate for Congress and which political party they were asked to vote for, whether the 2006 congressional elections were more important to the country than past elections, and whether the war with Iraq was worth fighting. Additional questions asked how much Congress should be blamed for problems relating to the war with Iraq, how much credit Congress should get for preventing terrorist attacks, whether respondents felt optimistic about the situation in Iraq, and if the United States had the same kind of involvement in the war with Iraq as it did the Vietnam war. Demographic variables include sex, age, religion, race, education level, household income, labor union membership, voter registration and participation history, political party affiliation, political philosophy, employment status, marital status, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).

This special-topic poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other social and political issues. This data collection contains information relating to the upcoming election, including respondents' party affiliations and voting preferences, their opinions of President Ronald Reagan's performance in office, and their views on the effect of different interest groups, such as environmentalists and the Moral Majority, on the United States. Demographic information about the respondents includes age, sex, race, religion, educational level, marital status, income, and type of residence.

Supplementary Empirical Teaching Units in Political Science (SETUPS) for American Politics are computer-related modules designed for use in teaching introductory courses in American government and politics. The modules are intended to demonstrate the process of examining evidence and reaching conclusions and to stimulate students to independent, critical thinking and a deeper understanding of substantive content. They enable students with no previous training to make use of the computer to analyze data on political behavior or to see the results of policy decisions by use of a simulation model. The SETUPS: AMERICAN POLITICS modules were developed by a group of political scientists with experience in teaching introductory American government courses who were brought together in a workshop supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation in the summer of 1974. The American Political Science Association administered the grant, and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research was host to the workshop and provided data for most of the SETUPS. The modules were tested and evaluated during the 1974-1975 academic year by students and faculty in 155 classes at 69 universities and colleges. Appropriate revisions were made based upon this experience. This collection comprises 15 separate modules: (1) Political Socialization Across the Generations, (2) Political Participation, (3) Voting Behavior, The 1980 Election, (4) Elections and the Mass Media, (5) The Supreme Court in American Politics, Court Decisions, (6) The Supreme Court in American Politics, Police Interrogations, (7) The Dynamics of Political Budgeting, A Public Policy Simulation, State Expenditures, (8) The Dynamics of Political Budgeting, A Public Policy Simulation, SIMSTATE Simulation, (9) The Dynamics of Political Budgeting, A Public Policy Simulation, SIMSTATE II Simulation, (10) Fear of Crime, (11) Presidential Popularity in America, Presidential Popularity, (12) Presidential Popularity in America, Advanced Analyses, (13) Campaign '80, The Public and the Presidential Selection Process, (14) Voting Behavior, The 1976 Election, and (15) Policy Responsiveness and Fiscal Strain in 51 American Communities. Parts 8 and 9 are FORTRAN IV program SIMSTATE sourcedecks intended to simulate the interaction of state policies. Variables in the various modules provide information on respondents' level of political involvement and knowledge of political issues, general political attitudes and beliefs, news media exposure and usage, voting behavior (Parts 1, 2, and 3), and sectional biases (15). Other items provide information on respondents' views of government, politics, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter as presidents, best form of government, government spending (Part 3), local police, the Supreme Court (Parts 4 and 15), the economy, and domestic and foreign affairs. Additional items probed respondents' opinions of prayer in school, abortion, the Equal Rights Amendment Law, nuclear energy, and the most important national problem and the political party most suitable to handle it (Part 3). Also included are items on votes of Supreme Court judges (Part 5), arrest of criminal suspects and their treatment by law enforcement agencies (Part 6), federal government expenditures and budgeting (Part 7), respondents' feelings of safety at home, neighborhood crime rate, frequency of various kinds of criminal victimization, the personal characteristics of the targets of those crimes (Part 10), respondents' opinions of and choice of party presidential candidates nominees (Part 13), voter turnout for city elections (15), urban unrest, and population growth rate. Demographic items specify age, sex, race, marital status, education, occupation, income, social class identification, religion, political party affiliation, and union membership.

The statistic above gives information on the most important issues for U.S. citizens to vote in midterm elections, as of September 2014. As of September 2014, about 57 percent of the Tea Party Republicans said the situation with Islamic militants in Iraq and Syria was extremely important to their vote.

This poll, fielded July 20-23, 2000, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they intended to vote in the November 7, 2000, presidential election and for whom they would vote if the election were held that day, given a choice between Vice President Al Gore (Democratic Party), Texas governor George W. Bush (Republican Party), conservative commentator Pat Buchanan (Reform Party), and consumer advocate Ralph Nader (Green Party). Respondents were asked to assess the importance of the following issues in their electoral decision-making and to specify which candidate they most trusted to do a better job addressing them: holding taxes down, protecting the Social Security system, improving education, improving the health care system, handling the economy, handling gun control, handling foreign affairs, encouraging high moral standards and values, handling the death penalty issue, protecting people's privacy on the Internet, handling the federal budget surplus, managing the federal budget, handling crime, protecting the environment, addressing women's issues, and appointing justices to the Supreme Court. Views were sought on whether presidential debates should be held, which candidates should be invited to participate, and whether respondents were satisfied with the presidential candidates. In addition, respondents were asked which candidate understood the problems of the American people, was a strong leader, would bring needed change to Washington, had the knowledge of world affairs it takes to serve effectively as president, could keep the economy strong, would say or do anything to get elected, had new ideas, said what he really thought, was honest and trustworthy, had an appealing personality, and had the right kind of experience to be president. Those queried were asked whether a difference existed between Gore and Bush on the issues about which the respondent cared and their personal qualities. Opinions were elicited on whether the top priority for the federal budget surplus should be cutting federal taxes, reducing the national debt, strengthening Social Security, or increasing spending on domestic programs. Additional questions covered abortion and the impact of Bush's naming a running mate who supported legalized abortion, Bush's handling of the death penalty while governor of Texas, voter intentions regarding the 2000 Congressional elections, whether a smaller government with fewer services is preferred to a larger government with many services, whether the country should continue to move in the direction that Clinton established, and whether it mattered who was elected president. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, political party, political orientation, voter registration and participation history, education, religion, labor union membership, Hispanic origin, household income, and neighborhood characteristics.

A significant increase in young people with a pro-European mind-set cast a vote in the 2019 European elections, according to a European Parliament’s in-depth Eurobarometer survey. Conducted in the weeks after the elections across all 28 Member States, nearly 28.000 citizens answered questions about their participation in the European elections and the issues that motivated them to vote.

Citizens’ support for the European Union remains at its highest level since 1983, as 68% of respondents say that their country has benefitted from being a member of the EU.

Even more significant for the democratic legitimacy of the EU is the steep increase in European citizens believing that ‘their voice counts in the EU’: 56% of respondents share this view, an increase of 7 points since March 2019 and the highest result since this question was first asked in 2002.

The overall turnout in the European elections 2019 increased by 8 points to 50,6%, resulting in the highest participation since 1994 and for the first time a reversal of turnout since 1979. It was Europe’s young and first time voters who drove turnout figures up: With 42% of the 16/18-24 year old citizens voting in the European elections, their participation rose by 50%, compared to the youth turnout of only 28% in 2014. Similarly strong was the 34% increase in the age group of 25-39 years, rising from 35% to 47%.

52% of voters said they voted in the European elections as they saw it as their civic duty, a plus of 11 points compared to 2014. Compared to the European elections 2014, significantly more citizens have also voted because they are in favour of the EU (25%, +11pp), or because they felt they could change things by voting (18%, +6pp). In 27 Member States, citizens primarily voted because they saw it as their duty as citizens, in all 28 Member States more respondents than in 2014 voted because they were in favour of the EU.

Looking at the issues that made citizens vote, the post-electoral survey shows that top issues which impacted on citizens’ voting decision were economy and growth (44%), climate change (37%) as well as human rights and democracy (37%). With 36% of mentions ‘the way the EU should be working in the future’ emerged also as top voting motivator for citizens.

When asked to choose the single most important issue for the upcoming 2022 congressional midterm elections, economic policy and abortion are the top concerns. The importance of abortion in 2022 has nearly tripled since the midterm elections of 2018. Respondents indicated that healthcare and immigration are also important. Healthcare was the most important issue in 2018 but has since dropped 12 percentage points.

This special topic poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and a range of other political and social issues. The study was conducted in part to assess respondents' interest in and opinions about the 2002 elections in New Jersey. Residents of that state were asked to give their opinions of President George W. Bush and his handling of the presidency, as well as their views of United States Senators Jon Corzine and Robert Torricelli, New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey, and former United States Senator Frank Lautenberg. Those queried were asked whether they intended to vote in the November 5, 2002, elections, and for whom they would vote if the election for United States Senator were held that day, given a choice between Lautenberg (Democratic Party) and Douglas Forrester (Republican Party). Respondents were also asked if Lautenberg and Forrester had spent more time during the campaign attacking each other or explaining what they would do if elected, whether they found the Senate race interesting or dull, what they considered to be the most important issue in deciding how to vote, and whether they considered their vote as a vote for or against Bush. Those polled answered sets of questions comparing Lautenberg and Forrester as Senate candidates in terms of their experience, honesty, integrity, age, political orientation, position on Iraq, and their potential decisions on United States Supreme Court nominees. A series of questions addressed the withdrawal of Torricelli from the Senate race and Lautenberg's replacement of him: whether Torricelli did the right thing by withdrawing, whether it was fair that the Democrats replaced him on the ballot, whether the New Jersey Supreme Court made the right decision by allowing his replacement, and whether that decision had made a difference in how the respondent intended to vote. Respondents' views were sought on the use of tax dollars to pay for abortions for indigent women, increased restrictions on the sale of handguns, whether the sentence for a murder conviction should be the death penalty or life in prison without parole, whether companies responsible for major pollution problems should be held accountable for the clean-up costs, and whether the government should cover losses incurred by individuals who chose to invest their Social Security taxes in the stock market. Additional questions probed respondents' views on corruption in New Jersey politics, the importance of which political party controls the United States Congress, the influence of Lautenberg and Forrester campaign advertisements, and whether the respondent would vote for musician Bruce Springsteen if he were a candidate for United States Senator from New Jersey. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, political party, political orientation, voter registration and participation history, handgun ownership, education, religion, marital status, Hispanic descent, race, years in community, and household income.

According to a 2024 survey just after the 2024 election, young adults in the United States were divided when it came to important political issues such as border security, gun violence prevention, and addressing climate change. However, the majority of young Americans considered the cost of living and inflation a top political issue, regardless of their race and ethnicity.

This poll, conducted August 1996, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on a range of political and social issues. Views were gathered on the 1996 presidential and congressional elections, as well as on President Bill Clinton and his handling of the presidency, the economy, and foreign affairs. Respondents were polled on whether they were better or worse off financially compared to three years ago, whether it was more important to cut federal taxes or balance the federal budget, and whether they supported middle class tax cuts, even if it meant cutting spending on federal programs. Questions involving the upcoming presidential election polled respondents on the likelihood that they would vote, whom they would vote for (President Bill Clinton, Republican Bob Dole, or Reform Party candidate Ross Perot), whether each candidate had the qualities needed to be an effective president, the success of their political campaigns, and who the Republican vice-presidential candidate should be. Opinions were solicited on whether the presidential candidates had a vision for the future of the country, had high moral and ethical standards, cared about people like the respondent, had new ideas, and stood up for what they believed in, and which one would do a better job handling issues such as the economy, crime, the environment, and Medicare. Respondents were queried on whether they would vote for a Democratic or Republican candidate in the upcoming United States House of Representatives election, whether they approved of the way the United States Congress was doing its job, and whether Pat Buchanan should be allowed to make a speech at the Republican convention. Respondents were also asked which political party best represented their ideal of how the United States should be governed, whether the views of each party were too conservative or too liberal, whether respondents supported Ross Perot's new Reform Party, and whether the country needed a new political party. Views were also elicited on issues such as a federal balanced budget amendment, the death penalty, congressional term limits, gun control, organized prayer in public schools, a flat-tax system, recent changes to the welfare system, affirmative action, gay rights, and whether respondents would prefer a smaller government with fewer services or a larger government with many services. Several questions addressed whether abortion should be legal, whether the Republican vice-presidential candidate should support legal abortion, and whether the Republican platform should support a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Other topics addressed respondents' level of confidence in the United States government to prevent future terrorist attacks, how worried they were about the possibility of major terrorist attacks in the United States, and whether the government should mount a war against terrorism, even if it cost billions of dollars and intruded on personal freedoms. Background variables include sex, age, ethnicity, marital status, employment status, education, religion, household income, social class, subjective size of community, labor union membership, political orientation, political party affiliation, and voter registration and participation history.

This poll, conducted June 22-25, 2006, is part of a continuing series of monthly polls that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way President George W. Bush was handling the presidency and issues such as the economy and the situation in Iraq. Several questions asked which political party respondents trusted to handle the main problems the country would face in the next few years, whether they would vote for a Democrat or Republican candidate if the November 2006 election for the United States House of Representatives were being held that day, and which issue was most important in their vote. Views were sought on the war in Iraq and whether it had improved the lives of the Iraqi people, encouraged democracy in other Arab nations, and contributed to the long-term security of the United States. Respondents were polled on whether the Bush Administration and the Democrats in the United States Congress had a clear plan for handling the situation in Iraq, how well the United States campaign against terrorism was going, whether the country was safer from terrorism than before September 11, 2001, and whether President Bush would be remembered more for the United States campaign against terrorism or the war in Iraq. A series of questions asked respondents whether they approved of the way United States military forces in Iraq were doing their job, whether a deadline should be set for their withdrawal from Iraq, and respondents' reactions to the alleged killings of Iraqi civilians by United States military forces. Additional topics addressed the death penalty, the federal government's detention of suspected terrorists without trial in the United States military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the federal government's progress in its efforts to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, education level, household income, political party affiliation, political philosophy, voter registration status, religious preference, and whether respondents considered themselves born-again or evangelical Christians.

March 1995: This survey was conducted by the Los Angeles Times from March 15-19, 1995 on a National sample of 1,007 registered voters. Major topics covered: Clinton job performance; party preference; US economy; Congress; Clinton in the 1996 election; abortion; Republican party politics; race relations; discrimination; affirmative action; Vietnam

October 1995: Right/wrong track; Bill Clinton job performance; party best able; Clinton vs. Congress; confidence in Congress; trusting government; government spending; economy; personal finances; political groups; favorability of political parties; two-party system; Hillary Rodham Clinton; welfare; environment; race relations; marriage; homosexual relations; Roe v. Wade; prayer in schools; moral climate; intolerance; immigration; United Nations; foreign policy; crime; assault weapons ban; own a handgun; on-line computer services; 1996 elections; third party; 1992 election; current employment; born again; the Bible.

February 1997: Direction of country; Bill Clinton job performance; congressional job performance; Clinton vs Republicans in Congress; issue with top priority; economy; Clinton impression; Newt Gingrich impression; State of the Union address; Clinton's proposals; balancing the budget; social security plans; financial health of the Medicare system; proposals to change Medicare; welfare reform bill; Clinton's ethics; Gingrich step down; Gingrich fine; Gingrich's punishment; Democratic National Committee; campaign finance reform bill; Clinton selling presidency; O.J. Simpson verdict; government medical insurance.

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31093058 and https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31093074. We highly recommend using the Roper Center version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

This special topic poll, conducted November 6-10, 1996, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of political and social issues. The focus of this data collection was on the presidential and congressional elections held November 5, 1996. In the days following the election, respondents who had voted were asked about their choice for president, when they decided on their candidate, whether they had known enough about the candidates to make an informed choice, and whether factors such as leadership and a candidate's stance on issues were major or minor reasons for their vote. Respondents were quizzed on their knowledge of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, as well as party platforms, campaign funding, and which party had the most members in the United States Congress. Views were sought on the media's treatment of the presidential candidates, campaign advertisements featuring the issue of Medicare, whether the presidential campaigns were more negative than in the past, and whether the news media should report public opinion poll results. Other topics addressed the condition of the national economy, abortion, sources of campaign information, types of negative news media coverage, and how much attention respondents paid to media coverage of the presidential campaign. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, ethnicity, education level, marital status, household income, political party affiliation, political philosophy, labor union membership, voter registration status, religious preference, and whether respondents thought of themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians.

The survey focused on the 2011 parliamentary elections in Finland. Main themes included political participation, political attitudes, party support, candidate and party choice and voting behaviour. Data were collected after the elections through face-to-face interviews and a self-administered drop-off questionnaire. The interview data contain Finland's contribution to the international CSES study. The same CSES module was fielded in Finland in 2007 (see FSD2269).

First questions covered interest in politics, attention to media coverage of the elections (including social media), Internet use frequency, willingness to discuss politics with others, party identification and self-perceived social class. The respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with some statements relating to voting, democracy, holding referendums and tolerance of people with different values or views. Willingness to influence things by own activity (for instance, by participating in a demonstration or joining a consumer boycott) was charted. Further questions covered membership in a political party, participation in election campaign work and opinions on whom a MP should represent. The survey also carried a set of attitudinal statements on voting, politics, political parties, politicians and public political influence. For instance 'I have no say in what the government and parliament decide' or 'By voting people can have a say how things are run'.

The CSES module explored what issues had been important to the respondents in these elections, what they thought were the most important political problems facing Finland and whether it made a difference who was in power or who people voted for. Views were probed on government performance, political parties, political leaders and whether any party or political leader represented R's views well. The respondents were asked to place themselves, the parties and party leaders on a left-right axis. Questions also covered differences between parties, the extent to which the respondents had followed election campaigning, satisfaction with democracy in Finland and whether they felt close to any party. Voting behaviour was studied with questions on whether the respondents had voted, the candidate of which party they had voted for, whether they had considered voting for a candidate of any other party and if yes, which party, whether they had voted in the previous parliamentary elections and which party they voted for. Finally, the respondents' factual knowledge was tested with a few questions.

Non-voters were asked why they had not voted and how self-evident not voting had been to them. Those who had voted for the True Finns were asked to what extent a number of issues had influenced their decision to vote for a candidate of that party and what had been the main reason. All those who had voted were asked what had influenced their choice of party, to what extent various issues had influenced their candidate choice, whether they had voted for the same candidate before and when had they decided whom and which party to vote for. One question explored how the respondents wanted MPs to vote in Parliament in cases where there was a conflict of opinion between them, their party or their voters. One theme pertained to trust in government and other institutions, groups and people.

The self-administered questionnaire surveyed what issues had been decisive for the respondents' party choice in the elections, opinions on what kind of policies Finland should focus on and what kind of political decision-making the respondents would prefer. Views were probed on work-related immigration to Finland and the policies of different parties on the issue. One question focused on information sources used for making voting choice. Political activities carried out on the Internet and type of activities generally engaged in when using social media and the Internet were charted. Other topics covered online voting, views on the importance of the candidate's gender and how easy it had been for the respondents to find a suitable party and candidate. The respondents were also asked to what extent they agreed with a number of statements relating to Members of Parliament, the government and political decision-making. Opinions on Finland's membership in the EU and NATO were surveyed as well as whether it was more important to let the majority decide or protect the needs and rights of minorities. Other topics included views on own financial situation and the Finnish economy and employment situation, left-right scale of certain concepts (e.g. being pro-immigration) and influence of a number of actors on the Finnish society. The effects of the debate on election campaign funding were charted as well as how the debate had influence the respondents' views of each political party. Finally, personality traits of the respondents were surveyed using the Ten-item personality inventory (TIPI).

Variables beginning with 'k' are national electi

Voters use salient issues to inform their vote choice. Using 2020 Cooperative Election Study (CES) data, we analyze how short, medium, and long term issues informed the vote for president in the 2020 election, which witnessed record-setting participation. To explain the dynamics of presidential vote choice, we employ a voter typology advanced by Key (1966). Specifically, compared to standpatters, who in 2020 registered the same major party vote as in 2016, we find that new voters in 2020 and voters switching their preferences from 2016 cast their ballots in favor of Democrat Joe Biden. In the end, President Donald Trump was denied reelection by new voters and vote switchers principally because certain issues had a notable effect in moving their presidential preferences in the Democratic direction.

FWISD8 Early Voting & Ballot by Mail Data

Precincts, Voters, and Election Participation

By Jason Brown [source]

About this dataset

This dataset contains comprehensive information about early voting and ballot by mail for Fort Worth ISD District 8. It includes key data points such as the full name, address lines 1-4, city, state, zip/zip+4 code of the voter; precinct and sub-precinct; ballot style, ballot party and voter party; election code and phone area/prefix/number; early voting site (if applicable) plus firstname and lastname of the voter. In addition to this voting information, the dataset also includes a field for the date that each voter cast their vote or submitted their mail in ballot. All of this data can be used to identify trends in voting behavior within a precinct or across Fort Worth ISD District 8 as a whole. With it, researchers may gain valuable insights into what motivates voters to go out and cast their ballots as well as other key information that can be used to increase democratic experiences in future elections

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides information on the voting and ballot by mail process in Fort Worth ISD District 8. This data can be used to answer questions about who participated and how they voted, as well as which areas are most active when it comes to voting.

To get started, here are some tips for using the dataset: - Explore the data columns - The columns provided in this dataset include full name, address information (address line 1 through 4), city, state, zip code, precinct number/subdivision numbers for early voting sites and precinct locations , ballot style/party affiliations of voters , election code, phone numbers of registered voters (area code & prefix) and vote-by-mail site . As you explore different use cases of this data set you may find other interesting connections or patterns between one column or another that can help answer questions or provide insights into voting practices in the area. - Look at voter turnout - Using this dataset you can analyze voter turnout over a given period of time to identify trends in voter engagement both within one district but also across various districts across Texas. Pay attention to both early voting sites & traditional polling locations when making comparisons as they tend towards different kinds of participation among residents - people who prefer early voting might not prefer traditional polling locations vice versa so it's important to look at both types together..
- Understand Voter Motivation - Examine what most drives voter involvement in elections? Examining factors such as location (rural vs urban), age demographics etc., can tell us about what motivates voters either positively or negatively regarding engagement in elections held within their district . Comparing these numbers with actual votes casted provides rich insight into motivation behind why people may not have voted .

By understanding the existing patterns between these datasets using sophisticated analytics methods ,we could make highly accurate predictions about which areas will have higher levels of turnout at an upcoming election . With this knowledge we could implement policies that help increase interest/participation even further enabling a more open/fair democratic process for everyone involved!

Research Ideas

• Understanding Voter Behavior: Using this dataset, research organizations and political campaigns can gain insight into how certain demographics are voting and who they are voting for.
• Targeted Campaign Ads: With this dataset, marketing teams can create demographic-specific ads aimed at getting people to turn out to vote or targeting voters with a specific persuasion.
• Polling Place Location: Analyzing the data in regards to polling places could help cities identify where it is most beneficial to open and close polling locations, as well as the length of opening hours needed at each location depending on voter turnout or trend along party lines in a particular area

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

See the dataset description for more information.

Columns

File: ev_vtrex_isdfw8.csv | Column name | Description | |:--------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------| | full_name | Full name of the voter. (String) | | addr_line1 ...