The 2024 US presidential election had been widely characterized as one of the most consequential political contests in recent US history. Although turnout was high for a presidential election – almost matching the levels of 2020 – it is estimated that close to 90 million Americans, roughly 36% of the eligible voting age population, did not vote. This number is greater than the number of people who voted for either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris.

More than a month on from polling day, eligible US voters from across the country as well as other parts of the world got in touch with the Guardian to share why they did not vote.

Scores of people said they had not turned out as they felt their vote would not matter because of the electoral college system, since they lived in a safely blue or red state. This included a number of people who nonetheless had voted in the 2020 and 2016 elections.

While various previous Democratic voters said they had abstained this time due to the Harris campaign’s stance on Israel or for other policy reasons, a number of people in this camp said they would have voted for the vice-president had they lived in a swing state.

  • Tinidril
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Not according to the article. Lots of voters in solid red or blue states didn’t see a point, and who am I to argue. Thanks to gerrymandering, this is often true even for local races. Why vote for a party that supports genocide when your vote is nothing but virtue signaling for a party bereft of virtue?

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Local elections matter a lot. If the government shits its pants and nominates total morons who literally have no idea how to perform their job, it falls to state elections and officials to pick up the slack. And if your state elects fucking idiots, your last line of defense are your city officials. And you better pray they are damn good at their job.

      You only want the best state officials, and the best only get elected if people vote. Out of 8,000,000 people in our state, 54 decided an election for a massive role during nov 2024. Four of those were from family, so a difference of about a block or three changed the outcome for millions of people. And we are deep blue. 50 votes away from a red candidate.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I’d be the one to argue …… I mean, fine if you really don’t see the point, but the reasoning on half of these people in the article is flawed. Either they were speaking out of ignorance or using excuses for poor citizenship, but when their reason contradicts reality, they should be argued

      And even if you’re in a solid red or blue state (like I am), your vote counts. Maybe it won’t change the results but they do pay attention. At the very least we could always say the Democratic candidate would win the popular vote. Not this time.

      If there’s ever going to be a chance at reforming the electoral college system, t starts by having the popular vote be consistently different from the electoral vote. From this election, there’s no reason for reform, because both had the same result

      • Tinidril
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        You say that yoyur the one to argue, but you made no argument. Why should someone in a solid red or blue state bother to vote for a Democratic presidential candidate that supports genocide? (I’m excluding other races here to keep it simple)

        If you really like a candidate, then I can see voting for them even if you know your vote is ultimately irrelevant. But, if you justifiably hate both candidates, one marginally less, a lesser of two evils argument only holds weight when your vote might actually matter.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago
          1. There are quite a few more people in the article than the summary - I bet you’d also spot a bunch that give invalid reasons
          2. If your single issue is the atrocity in Gaza, both support that so it is not a valid decision. If you believe Trumps words, he’d make it worse.
          3. Your vote always matters, even if it’s the lesser of two evils. Even if it didn’t affect the results this time
          • Tinidril
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            You didn’t comment on the article, you responded to my point on a singular common justification.

            Trump and Harris both support the genocide making (theoretical) me uncomfortable voting for either. If my vote might matter, then I would hold my nose and vote for the lesser evil. If not, then I’d rather signal my disapproval of both.

            Saying that my vote always matters is a nice cliche, but you know perfectly well that in a bunch of states it’s just not true. If my vote put Harris over the top in Illinois, it’s an absolute certainty that she got destroyed nationally. So, even if my vote mattered, it wouldn’t matter that it mattered.

            If the only real consequence of my vote is an impotent signal of approval, then not voting is an impotent signal of disapproval. That matters just as much, if not more.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              19 hours ago

              Trump and Harris both support the genocide making (theoretical) me uncomfortable voting for either.

              Theoretical you and a bunch of real people just didn’t give a shit about the fact that Trump is going to add domestic genocide to the agenda. Theoretical you was told directly by Trump himself that immigrants were “vermin” and “criminals” and he was going to get them all on the track to deportation on day one. Theoretical you should have taken a few seconds to put two and two together and realize that means concentration camps and anyone with darker skin being suspected.

              But even if theoretical you is one of those darker-skinned people, you thought, “well he’s not going to put me in a concentration deportation camp, so I don’t have to worry about that while there’s a genocide happening on the other side of the world that both candidates support.”

              It’s pretty fucking heartless of theoretical you and all the actual people who didn’t give a flying fuck about anyone but themselves, but liked to pretend they cared by pretending that the one genocide was the only genocide.

              • Tinidril
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                I’m certainly convinced that you are a Democrat. I can tell because you ignored what I said and gave the rant you wanted to give, completely oblivious to the fact that none if it applies to what I said. You can’t get any more Democratic than that. Scolding voters is not a great strategy.

              • Anamnesis@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                18 hours ago

                You’re ignoring the fact that this person clearly would have voted for Harris if they were in a swing state. Harris did not lose Illinois and this person got to avoid getting blood on their hands via voting for perpetuation of genocide. That sounds far more ethical and rational than just knee jerk voting no matter what.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      You have it backwards - not voting because of a single issue is the real virtue signaling. Voting for the lesser of two evils is simply pragmatic.

      • Tinidril
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        not voting because of a single issue is the real virtue signaling.

        You’re just making assertions, not arguments. You’re also not paying attention because this makes zero sense as a response to my argument.

        My entire point was that signaling is all than many voters can do because their vote is irrelevant. Skipping the presidential race is a signal too.

        Also, fuck referring to the mass slaughter of civilians as just a “single issue”.

        • makyo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          No - fuck handing the government to a criminal and his fascist cronies in order to prove a point. The USA is nearly completely lost to the oligarchs and we played right into their hands. The war in Gaza is diespicable and awful and we just elected a group who will strip away even more of the power we had to try and stop that atrocity and future atrocities.

          • Tinidril
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            17 hours ago

            fuck handing the government to a criminal and his fascist cronies in order to prove a point.

            Know why Democrats lose so many damn elections? They don’t know how to fucking listen to what people are saying. That you think this has anything to do with my comment is absolutely bizarre. Neither I, nor the voter I’m talking about cost the Democrats a damn thing.

            The USA is nearly completely lost to the oligarchs and we played right into their hands.

            No fucking kidding. You’re half way to the truth. Now you just have to embrace the reality that “oligarchs” includes the Clintons, Obamas, Pelosis, Schumers, and (to a lesser degree) Biden’s. Then you will really understand how truly fucked this country is.

            we just elected a group who will strip away even more of the power we had

            Who’s “we”? The main difference between Republicans and Democrats is that the Republicans have no shame. Democrats feel kind of bad about screwing us for their handlers, so they throw us a bone from time to time. In that dynamic, what’s happening now was inevitable and it was just a matter of when.

            We should have overthrown the Democrats in 2020 to create a new dynamic, but we missed our chance. Nobody knows when or if we will get another. The Republicans will never be any better than they are until they have to face an emboldened and left-populist Democratic party. The party we have is light years from being that.

            • makyo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              In spite of your rather insulting way of putting things I actually agree with most of what you’re saying, and yet even still voting Kamala was the easiest and most obvious choice voters had to make in decades and somehow still failed.

              • Tinidril
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 hours ago

                I didn’t react well to being implicated in “handing the government to a criminal and his fascist cronies in order to prove a point”. Criticism of voters in general gets under my skin because it’s so counter productive.