Talk:Elections in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why are US elections held on the first Tuesday in November?[edit]

Is there any reason for this? I know it's tradition, but is it completely arbitrary? Why not a weekend? Elijya (talk) 04:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Partial answer to ancient question: The forefathers would have never scheduled a profane event on Sunday, the Lord's day. There was no reason to schedule weekends for voting in an economy that was primarily rural. A Tuesday would have been an opportunity for people "to come to town and vote." There were few 8-5 workers. Student7 (talk) 19:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I contend that you could not source your claim of the forefathers having any deference for the Lord's day. Kidding or otherwise, others should read about Deism and Thomas Jefferson and religion. There's also an interesting group http://www.whytuesday.org which looks for answers to that very question. 71.178.240.197 (talk) 00:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia thinks it was prosaic. See Election_Day_(United_States)#History. Student7 (talk) 02:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Ah, to be fair consideration for others beliefs and more importantly likelihood of going to the polls was likely a consideration, though the overwhelming reasoning stands as the agrarian society. (Interestingly the source in the history section is to an article on the Why Tuesday? group.) 71.178.240.197 (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Voting system[edit]

It seems like no mention of what voting systems are used throughout the US is mentioned here. Scott Ritchie 02:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

-seconded. That's what I was looking for too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.45.194 (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Miltonballotpaper.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Miltonballotpaper.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Now with fair use rationale. --Electiontechnology (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Congressional elections[edit]

I noticed that almost all the articles about congressional elections are unreferenced. I would like to ask if somebody knows where I can find the complete results of congressional election in the Internet. --Checco (talk) 19:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Project?[edit]

Is there a project established to help build the articles about US Elections? Chadlupkes (talk) 02:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

First Tuesday?[edit]

Actually, the presidential election is held on the Tuesday following the first Monday in November, but I don't know why it was established that way.ETO Buff (talk) 09:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Bugs[edit]

Error at the bottom of the main page that's beyond my skill. There's a list "Elections in the United States" that is FUBAR with wiki markup words like Template, fullurl, name, and action visible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.92.11.25 (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Merging all U.S. states presidential primary and election articles[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012#Merging all U.S. states presidential primary and election articles into one article for each state. The proposal is to merge all articles on different state primaries (both democratic and republican) and the articles on the presidential election (where such exist) in to one single article for each state. See United States presidential election in New Hampshire, 2008 It is possible to see how the 2008 and 2012 articles will look like if this large merges was completed. This issue have been discussed for a month on this talkpage without a clear consensus and the merge proposal is so massive that it would be good to get a wide range of editors to comment on it. Jack Bornholm (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Voting Method[edit]

This section (practically the first in the article) claims our system is "first past the post" with no requirement for a majority. This isn't true. In presidential elections, a candidate must receive 50% of the electoral votes to secure the nomination. I think this section should be expanded so as to not confuse people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.129.27.141 (talk) 17:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Presidential elections/Electoral College[edit]

This section doesn't cite any sources, and seems to rely on anecdotal evidence. It may also be slanted towards the abolition of the electoral college since it focuses heavily on supposed criticism without noting the counterpoints, ie. if presidential elections were strictly based on plurality of popular vote then states with big populations like California might sweep an election. I think this section should be cleaned up, with citations and a more rounded explanation of the electoral college. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.129.27.141 (talk) 17:36, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Good point! And, of course, the Founding Fathers did this deliberately to enable the small states to ratify the original US Constitution, otherwise there wouldn't be a USA! The media loves the idea, but the small states hate it, so of course, it can't be ratified. I suppose we have to report it because 1) the media raises the issue each election year and 2) the Democrats like it because they would be able to campaign by subway, nevermind all this jetting around! See blue-red by county Student7 (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Summarized section replaced[edit]

A paragraph reads "The United States has perhaps the most complicated electoral system in the world. Voters are asked to make more decisions and asked to do so more frequently than citizens of other democracies[attribution needed]. This Byzantine electoral structure in the US does provide the greatest opportunity for input, but at a cost—by demanding so much of the public it means that many are overwhelmed by the complexity of the system and ultimately fail to vote ("democratic overload").(ref)Anthony Gierzynski, Saving American Elections: A Diagnosis and Prescription for a Healthier Democracy (Cambria Press, 2011).(endref)

I read the citation which says, in its key part:

" Large portions of the public are disengaged and uniformed. Voter turnout is low; in fact, it is even lower than voter turnout in most other democratic nations. The electorate is cynical about elections, politics, and government and appears poorly informed on many important issues and the basics of the American political system. Elections are lacking in the competition necessary to make electoral choices meaningful: lopsided redistricting and unequal distribution of campaign money mean that many races provide voters with no viable choice. When the elections are competitive, the way voters make their choices often renders election outcomes meaningless in terms of actually directing government policy."

It says nothing about "Byzantine", "making more decisions," or "failing to vote." Certainly "more often" is out of place since most Europeans often go to the polls several times a year. There seems to be no connection between the material presented and "failing to vote." There are a number of reasons why people fail to vote, but they don't seem to be listed here.

So I tried to replace it with material which appeared to summarize the reference:

"The electorate seems cynical and poorly informed on important issues. Voter turnout is low. Choices given to the electorate are often not meaningful.(sameref)

It was reverted. Student7 (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Governors and Gubernatorial Elections[edit]

Guide to U.S. Elections (Sixth ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. 2010. pp. 1565–1660. ISBN 978-1-60426-536-1. gives the governors from 1776 and the gubernatorial election returns from 1776 (also the gubernatorial primary election returns from 1919 on pages 1661-1732) if anyone has the time to copy out the details from before 1964 into Wikipedia. Rmallett (talk) 14:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

The section on waiting times in North Dakota seems like a non sequitur. Ottoump (talk) 20:48, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Agree with Ottoump. Rm material. It can go elsewhere in Wikipedia. Sounds like WP:BOOSTER at this level. Student7 (talk) 01:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Elections in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:53, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Elections in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 20 December 2017 (UTC)