Voting

Method to make collective decisions

"Vote" and "Voter" redirect here. For other uses, see Vote (disambiguation) and Voter (disambiguation).

Clockwise from top left: ballot for a referendum in Panama, ballot box for a French election, women voting in Bangladesh, an electronic voting machine in Brazil, a sign at a United States voting location, election inking on a man's finger in Afghanistan

Part of the Politics series

Voting

Balloting

|  Ballots

* Absentee ballot
* Provisional ballot
* Sample ballot

Candidates and Ballot measures

* Write-in candidate
* Electorate
* Slate
* Ticket

Collection

* Ballot box
* Compulsory voting
* Early voting
* Electronic voting
* Open ballot
* Polling place
* Postal voting
* Precinct
* Vote center
* Voting booth

Counting

* Popular vote
* Tally
* Voting machine

Electoral systems

|  Plurality and majoritarian systems

* First-past-the-post voting
* Two-round system
* Instant-runoff voting
* Plurality-at-large voting
* General ticket
* Usual judgment

Proportional and semi-proportional systems

* Single non-transferable vote
* Cumulative voting
* Binomial system
* Party-list
* Single transferable voting
* Spare vote

Mixed-member systems

* Mixed-member proportional
* Additional member system
* Mixed single vote (positive vote transfer)
* Scorporo (negative vote transfer)
* Mixed ballot transferable vote
* Alternative Vote Plus
* Dual-member proportional
* Rural–urban proportional
* Majority bonus system
* Parallel voting (Mixed member majoritarian)

Voting strategies

* Issue voting
* Fusion voting
* Public opinion
* Split-ticket voting
* Lesser-evil voting
* Straight-ticket voting
* Tactical voting
* Vote pairing

Protest votes

* Abstention
* Donkey vote
* Election boycott
* None of the above
* Refused ballot
* Spoilt vote

Voting patterns and effects

* Coattail effect
* Voting advice application
* Likely voter
* Paradox of voting
* Passive electioneering
* Vote splitting
* Political apathy
* Voter fatigue
* Voter turnout

Protest votes

Electoral fraud and prevention

* Ballot harvesting
* Ballot stuffing
* Voter intimidation
* Vote buying
* Voter suppression
* Voter caging

Prevention

* Election ink
* Secret ballot
* Voter identification laws
* Voter registration
* End-to-end verifiable voting

Politics portal

* v
* t
* e

A joint Politics and Economics series

Social choice and electoral systems

* Social choice
* Mechanism design
* Comparative politics
* Comparison
* List (By country)

Single-winner methods

Single vote – plurality methods

* First preference plurality (FPP)
* Two-round (US: Jungle primary)
* Partisan primary
* Instant-runoff
* UK: Alternative vote (AV)
* US: Ranked-choice (RCV)
* Party block voting
* Plurality block voting

* * *

Condorcet methods

* Condorcet-IRV
* Round-robin voting
* Minimax
* Kemeny
* Schulze
* Ranked pairs
* Maximal lottery

* * *

Positional voting

* Plurality (el. IRV)
* Borda count (el. Baldwin, Mdn. Bucklin)
* Antiplurality (el. Coombs)

* * *

Cardinal voting

* Score voting
* Approval voting
* Majority judgment
* STAR voting

Proportional representation

Party-list

* Apportionment
* Highest averages
* Largest remainders
* National remnant
* Biproportional
* List type
* Closed list
* Open list
* Panachage
* List-free PR
* Localized list

* * *

Quota-remainder methods

* Hare STV
* Schulze STV
* CPO-STV
* Quota Borda

* * *

Approval-based committees

* Thiele's method
* Phragmen's method
* Expanding approvals rule
* Method of equal shares

* * *

Fractional social choice

* Direct representation
* Interactive representation
* Liquid democracy
* Fractional approval voting
* Maximal lottery
* Random ballot

* * *

Semi-proportional representation

* Cumulative
* SNTV
* Limited voting

Mixed systems

By results of combination

* Mixed-member majoritarian
* Mixed-member proportional

* * *

By mechanism of combination

* Non-compensatory
* Parallel (superposition)
* Coexistence
* Conditional
* Fusion (majority bonus)
* Compensatory
* Seat linkage system
* UK: 'AMS'
* NZ: 'MMP'
* Vote linkage system
* Negative vote transfer
* Mixed ballot
* Supermixed systems
* Dual-member proportional
* Rural–urban proportional
* Majority jackpot

* * *

By ballot type

* Single vote
* Double simultaneous vote
* Dual-vote

Paradoxes and pathologies

Spoiler effects

* Spoiler effect
* Cloning paradox
* Frustrated majorities paradox
* Center squeeze

* * *

Pathological response

* Perverse response
* Best-is-worst paradox
* No-show paradox
* Multiple districts paradox

* * *

Strategic voting

* Lesser evil voting
* Exaggeration
* Truncation
* Turkey-raising
* Wasted vote

* * *

Paradoxes of majority rule

* Tyranny of the majority
* Discursive dilemma
* Conflicting majorities paradox

Social and collective choice

Impossibility theorems

* Arrow's theorem
* Majority impossibility
* Moulin's impossibility theorem
* McKelvey–Schofield chaos theorem
* Gibbard's theorem

* * *

Positive results

* Median voter theorem
* Condorcet's jury theorem
* May's theorem
* Condorcet dominance theorems
* Harsanyi's utilitarian theorem
* VCG mechanism
* Quadratic voting

* Politics portal
* Economics portal

Mathematics portal

* v
* t
* e

Voting is the process of choosing officials or policies by casting a ballot, a document used by people to formally express their preferences. Republics and representative democracies are governments where the population chooses representatives by voting.

The procedure for identifying the winners based on votes varies depending on both the country and the political office. Political scientists call these procedures electoral systems, while mathematicians and economists call them social choice rules. The study of these rules and what makes them good or bad is the subject of a branch of welfare economics known as social choice theory.

In smaller organizations, voting can occur in many different ways: formally via ballot to elect others for example within a workplace, to elect members of political associations, or to choose roles for others; or informally with a spoken agreement or a gesture like a raised hand. In larger organizations, like countries, voting is generally confined to periodic elections.

## In politics

[edit]

In a democracy, the government is elected by the people who vote in an election: a way for an electorate to elect, that is choose, from several different candidates.[1] It is more than likely that elections will be between two opposing parties. These two will be the most established and most popular parties in the country. For example, in the US, the competition is between the Republicans and the Democrats. In an indirect democracy, voting is the method by which the person elected (in charge) represents the people, whilst making decisions. Direct democracy is the complete opposite, the people make the policy decisions directly without selecting a representative to do it for them.

A majority vote is when more than half of voters vote for the same person or party. However, whilst it is usually said each individual's vote does count, many countries use a combination of factors to decide who has power, not the at-large "popular vote". Most influential of these factors are districts that divide the electorate. For example, in the UK a party winning plurality in a majority of constituencies wins majority government, but they may not always have the most individual votes (i.e. they may have lose the popular vote but still win the seat count). (It is also possible for a party to win plurality in a minority of constituencies (but more than any other one party) and thus win minority government.)

All modern liberal democracies use voting by secret ballot to prevent individuals from becoming influenced by other people and to protect their political privacy. The objective of secret ballots is to try to achieve the most authentic outcome, without any risk of pressure, threat, or services linked to one's vote; this way, a person is able to express their actual preferences.

Voting often takes place at a polling station but voting can also be done remotely by mail or using internet voting (such as in Estonia). Voting is voluntary in some countries, like the UK, but it may be required by law in others, such as Australia.

### Electoral systems

[edit]

Main articles: Electoral system and Social choice function

There are many electoral methods. The purpose of an election may be to choose one person, such as a president, or a group, such as a committee or a parliament. In electing a parliament, either each of many small constituencies can elect a single representative, as in Britain; or each of a lesser number of multi-member constituencies may elect two or more representatives, as in Ireland; or multi-member districts and some single-member districts can be used; or the entire country can be treated as one "at-large" district, as in The Netherlands.

In Switzerland, without the need to register, every citizen receives at home the ballot papers and information brochure for each voting (and can send it by post). Switzerland has a direct democracy system and votes (and elections) are organized about four times a year; here, to Berne's citizens in November 2008 about 5 national, 2 cantonal, 4 municipal referendums, and 2 elections (government and parliament of the City of Berne) to take care of at the same time.

Different voting systems use different ballot designs. Some ballots allow only one choice to be selected (single X voting); others allow ranking or selecting multiple options (Ranked ballots).

Different voting systems allow each voter to cast a different number of votes - only one (single voting as in First-past-the-post voting, Single non-transferable voting and Single transferable voting); as many as are being elected in a multiple-member district (multiple voting as used in Plurality block voting; more than one but fewer than are being elected in a multiple-member district (Limited voting). Most allow a voter to put just one vote on each candidate, but others allow a voter's votes to be piled on to one candidate.

Different voting systems require different levels of support to be elected. Plurality voting (First-past-the-post voting) elects the candidate with more votes than any other single candidate. It does not require the winner to achieve a voting majority, to have more than half of the total votes cast. In First-past-the-post voting, when more than two candidates run, the winner commonly has less than half of the vote, as few as 18 percent was recorded in 2014 in Toronto.[2] In Instant-runoff voting, a candidate must have a majority of votes to be elected, although presence of exhausted votes may mean that the majority at time of final count is not majority of votes cast.

In STV, any candidate who takes quota (usually set at much less than half of the votes) is elected; others without quota (but with more votes than any other single candidate) may be declared elected as well.

Side effects of First-past-the-post voting include a waste of votes due to vote splitting, a two-party system and political polarization due to electing candidates that do not support centrism. To understand why a race using First-past-the-post voting tends to favor less-centric candidates, consider a simple lab experiment where students in a class vote for their favorite marble. If five marbles are assigned names and are placed "up for election", and if three of them are green, one is red, and one is blue, then a green marble will rarely win the election. The reason for the green's lack of success is vote splitting. The three green marbles will split the votes of those who prefer green. In fact, in this analogy, the only way that a green marble is likely to win is if more than three-fifths of the voters prefer green. If the same number of people prefer green as those who prefer red and blue, that is to say, if one-third of the voters prefer green, one-third prefer blue, and one-third prefer red, then each green marble will only get one-ninth of the vote, if the green marbles each take same number of votes, while the red and blue marbles will each get one-third, putting the green marbles at a serious disadvantage. If the experiment is repeated with other colors, the color that is in the majority (if the majority is split among multiple choices) will still rarely win. In other words, from a purely mathematical perspective, a single-winner system tends to favor a winner that is different from the majority, if the majority runs multiple candidates, and if the minority group runs just one candidate. This minority rule success can also result if multiple winners are elected and voters cast multiple votes (Plurality block voting). But even if the majority is split among multiple candidates, proportionate results can still be produced if votes can be transferred, as under STV, or if multiple winners are elected and each voter has just one vote.

A man voting in the Czech Republic in 2014

Alternatives to first-past-the-post voting include approval voting, two-round, proportional representation, and instant-runoff voting. With approval voting, voters are encouraged to vote for as many candidates as they approve of, so the winner is much more likely to be any one of the five marbles because people who prefer green will be able to vote for every one of the green marbles. With two-round elections, the field of candidates is thinned prior to the second round of voting. In most cases, the winner must receive a majority of the votes, which is more than half. If no candidate obtains a majority in the first round, then the two candidates with the most significant plurality run again for the second round of voting. Variants exist regarding these two points: the requirement for being elected at the first round is sometimes less than 50%, and the rules for participation in the runoff may vary.

With single-round ranked voting, such as instant-runoff voting system as used in some elections in Australia and the United States, voters rank each candidate in order of preference (1,2,3,4 etc.). Votes are distributed to each candidate according to the first preferences. If no single candidate has 50% of the vote, then the candidate with the fewest votes is excluded and their votes are redistributed according to the voter's nominated order of preference. The process repeats itself until a candidate has 50% or more votes. The system is designed to produce the same result as an exhaustive ballot but using only a single round of voting.

Ranked voting is also used in a PR format. PR-STV is used in Australia, Ireland and Malta. Quota is calculated. In say a four-seat constituency, quota (if Droop quota is used) is 20 percent of the valid vote plus 1. Every candidate with quota (of 1st preferences alone or combination of first preferences and later preferences) will be elected. If a candidate has more than a quota and seats are yet to be filled, his/her surplus will be distributed to the other candidates in proportion to all of that candidate's 2nd preferences, in line with secondary preferences marked on the vote if any. If there are still candidates to be elected and no surplus votes to be transferred, the least-popular is eliminated, as above in AV or IRV, and the process continues until four candidates have reached a quota or are declared elected when the field of candidates is thinned to the number of remaining open seats.

In the Quota Borda System (QBS),[3] the voters also cast their preferences, 1,2,3,4... as they wish. In the analysis, all 1st preferences are counted; all 2nd preferences are counted; after these preferences have been translated into points per the rules of a Modified Borda Count (MBC), the candidates' points are also counted. Seats are awarded to any candidates with a quota of 1st preferences; to any pair of candidates with two quotas of 1st/2nd preferences; and if seats are still to be filled, to those candidates with the highest MBC scores.

In a voting system that uses multiple votes (Plurality block voting), the voter can vote for any subset of the running candidates. So, a voter might vote for Alice, Bob, and Charlie, rejecting Daniel and Emily. Approval voting uses such multiple votes.

In a voting system that uses a ranked vote, the voter ranks the candidates in order of preference. For example, they might mark a preference for Bob in the first place, then Emily, then Alice, then Daniel, and finally Charlie. Ranked voting systems, such as those used in Australia and Ireland, use a ranked vote.

In a voting system that uses a scored vote (or range vote), the voter gives each alternative a number between one and ten (the upper and lower bounds may vary). See cardinal voting systems.

Some "multiple-winner" systems such as the Single Non-Transferable Vote, SNTV, used in Afghanistan and Vanuatu give a single vote or one vote per elector per available position.

STV uses single ranked votes; block voting (Plurality-at-large voting) are often used for at-large positions such as on some city councils.

Finally, the Condorcet rule is used (sometimes) in decision-making. The voters or elected representatives cast their preferences on one, some, or all options, 1,2,3,4... as in PR-STV or QBS. In the analysis, option A is compared to option B, and if A is more popular than B, then A wins this pairing. Next, A is compared with option C, then D, and so on. Likewise, B is compared with C, D, etc. The option which wins the most pairings, (if there is one), is the Condorcet winner.→

### Women's suffrage

[edit]

Suffrage poster, 1920

This section is an excerpt from Women's suffrage.[edit]

Women's suffrage is the right of women to vote in elections. Several instances occurred in recent centuries where women were selectively given, then stripped of, the right to vote. In Sweden, conditional women's suffrage was in effect during the Age of Liberty (1718–1772), as well as in Revolutionary and early-independence New Jersey (1776–1807) in the US.[4][5]

Pitcairn Island allowed women to vote for its councils in 1838.[6] The Kingdom of Hawai'i, which originally had universal suffrage in 1840, rescinded this in 1852 and was subsequently annexed by the United States in 1898. In the years after 1869, a number of provinces held by the British and Russian empires conferred women's suffrage, and some of these became sovereign nations at a later point, like New Zealand, Australia, and Finland. Several states and territories of the United States, such as Wyoming (1869) and Utah (1870), also granted women the right to vote. Women who owned property gained the right to vote in the Isle of Man in 1881, and in 1893, women in the then self-governing[7] British colony of New Zealand were granted the right to vote. In Australia, the colony of South Australia granted women the right to vote and stand for parliament in 1895[8][9] while the Australian Federal Parliament conferred the right to vote and stand for election in 1902 (although it allowed for the exclusion of "aboriginal natives").[10][11] Prior to independence, in the Russian Grand Duchy of Finland, women gained equal suffrage, with both the right to vote and to stand as candidates in 1906.[12][13][14] National and international organizations formed to coordinate efforts towards women voting, especially the International Woman Suffrage Alliance (founded in 1904 in Berlin, Germany).[15]

Most major Western powers extended voting rights to women by the interwar period, including Canada (1917), Germany (1918), the United Kingdom (1918 for women over 30 who met certain property requirements, 1928 for all women), Austria, the Netherlands (1919) and the United States (1920).[16] Notable exceptions in Europe were France, where women could not vote until 1944, Greece (equal voting rights for women did not exist there until 1952, although, since 1930, literate women were able to vote in local elections), and Switzerland (where, since 1971, women could vote at the federal level, and between 1959 and 1990, women got the right to vote at the local canton level). The last European jurisdictions to give women the right to vote were Liechtenstein in 1984 and the Swiss canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden at the local level in 1990,[17] with the Vatican City being an absolute elective monarchy (the electorate of the Holy See, the conclave, is composed of male cardinals, rather than Vatican citizens). In some cases of direct democracy, such as Swiss cantons governed by Landsgemeinden, objections to expanding the suffrage claimed that logistical limitations, and the absence of secret ballot, made it impractical as well as unnecessary; others, such as Appenzell Ausserrhoden, instead abolished the system altogether for both women and men.[18][19][20]

Leslie Hume argues that the First World War changed the popular mood:

> The women's contribution to the war effort challenged the notion of women's physical and mental inferiority and made it more difficult to maintain that women were, both by constitution and temperament, unfit to vote. If women could work in munitions factories, it seemed both ungrateful and illogical to deny them a place in the voting booth. But the vote was much more than simply a reward for war work; the point was that women's participation in the war helped to dispel the fears that surrounded women's entry into the public arena.[21]

Pre-WWI opponents of women's suffrage such as the Women's National Anti-Suffrage League cited women's relative inexperience in military affairs. They claimed that since women were the majority of the population, women should vote in local elections, but due to a lack of experience in military affairs, they asserted that it would be dangerous to allow them to vote in national elections.[22]

Extended political campaigns by women and their supporters were necessary to gain legislation or constitutional amendments for women's suffrage. In many countries, limited suffrage for women was granted before universal suffrage for men; for instance, literate women or property owners were granted suffrage before all men received it. The United Nations encouraged women's suffrage in the years following World War II, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979) identifies it as a basic right with 189 countries currently being parties to this convention.

### Referendums

[edit]

When the citizens of a country are invited to vote, they are participating in an election. However, people can also vote in referendums and initiatives. Since the end of the eighteenth century, more than five hundred national referendums (including initiatives) were organized in the world; among them, more than three hundred were held in Switzerland.[23] Australia ranked second with dozens of referendums.

Most referendums are binary. The first multi-option referendum was held in New Zealand in 1894, and most of them are conducted under a two-round system. New Zealand had a five-option referendum in 1992, while Guam had a six-option plebiscite in 1982, which also offered a blank option, in case some voters wanted to (campaign and) vote for a seventh option.

### Proxy voting

[edit]

Main article: Proxy voting

Proxy voting is a form of voting in which a registered citizen who can legally vote passes on his or her vote to a different voter or electorate who will vote in his stead.

### Anti-voting

[edit]

Main articles: Abstention and Abstentionism

In South Africa, there is a strong presence of anti-voting campaigns by poor citizens. They make the structural argument that no political party truly represents them. This resulted in the "No Land! No House! No Vote!" campaign, which becomes very prominent each time the country holds elections.[24][25] The campaign is prominent among three of South Africa's largest social movements: the Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign, Abahlali baseMjondolo, and the Landless Peoples Movement.

Other social movements in other parts of the world also have similar campaigns or non-voting preferences. These include the Zapatista Army of National Liberation and various anarchist-oriented movements.

It is possible to make a blank vote, carrying out the act of voting, which may be compulsory, without selecting any candidate or option, often as an act of protest. In some jurisdictions, there is an official none of the above option and it is counted as a valid vote. Usually, blank and null votes are counted (together or separately) but are not considered valid.

### Voting and information

[edit]

Modern political science has questioned whether average citizens have sufficient political knowledge to cast meaningful votes. A series of studies coming out of the University of Michigan in the 1950s and 1960s argued that many voters lack a basic understanding of current issues, the liberal–conservative ideological dimension, and the relative ideological dilemma that are important to understand when making political decisions.[26] Studies from other institutions have suggested that the physical appearance of candidates is a criterion upon which voters base their decision.[27][28] Voting advice applications can increase political knowledge enabling to cast informed votes.[29]

### Religious views

[edit]

Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Old Order Amish, Rastafarians, the Assemblies of Yahweh, and some other religious groups, have a policy of not participating in politics and this extends to voting.[30][31] Rabbis from all Jewish denominations encourage voting and some even consider it a religious obligation.[32] The Catholic Church teaches that it is morally obligatory to vote.[33]

## Meetings and gatherings

[edit]

Whenever several people who do not all agree need to make some decision, voting is a very common way of reaching a decision peacefully. The right to vote is usually restricted to certain people. Members of a society or club, or shareholders of a company, but not outsiders, may elect its officers, or adopt or change its rules, in a similar way to the election of people to official positions. A panel of judges, either formal judicial authorities or judges of the competition, may decide by voting. A group of friends or members of a family may decide which film to see by voting. The method of voting can range from formal submission of written votes, through show of hands, voice voting or audience response systems, to informal noting which outcome seems to be preferred by more people.

### In deliberative assemblies

[edit]

Main article: Voting methods in deliberative assemblies

Some votes are carried out in person if all the people eligible to vote are present. This could be by a show of hands or keypad polling.

Deliberative assemblies—bodies that use parliamentary procedure to arrive at decisions—use several methods when voting on motions (formal proposals by a member or members of a deliberative assembly). The regular methods of voting in such bodies are a voice vote, a rising vote, and a show of hands. Additional forms of voting include a recorded vote and balloting. The assembly can decide on the voting method by adopting a motion on it.

## Voting methods

[edit]

"Voting method" redirects here; not to be confused with Electoral system.

### Paper-based methods

[edit]

Young woman's first vote. Cooktown, Australia.

The most common voting method uses paper ballots on which voters mark their preferences. This may involve marking their support for a candidate or party listed on the ballot, or a write-in where they write out the name of their preferred candidate (if it is not listed).

Ballot letters in Israel

An alternative method that is still paper-based known as ballot letters is used in Israel, where polling booths contain a tray with ballots for each party running in the elections; the ballots are marked with the letter(s) assigned to that party. Voters are given an envelope into which they put the ballot of the party they wish to vote for, before placing the envelope in the ballot box. The same system is also implemented in Latvia. The system is used commonly in open lists or primary elections, where voters must choose a single party whose candidates they are allowed to choose between.

### Machine voting

[edit]

Main articles: Voting machine and Electronic voting

Machine voting uses voting machines, which may be manual (e.g. lever machines) or electronic.[34]

### Online voting

[edit]

Some countries allow people to vote online. Estonia was one of the first countries to use online voting: it was first used in their 2005 local elections.[35]

### Postal voting

[edit]

Many countries allow postal voting, where voters are sent a ballot and return it by post.

### Open ballot

[edit]

In contrast to a secret ballot, an open ballot takes place in public and is commonly done by a show of hands. An example is the Landsgemeinde system in Switzerland, which is still in use in the cantons of Appenzell Innerrhoden, Glarus, Grisons, and Schwyz.

### Other methods

[edit]

In Gambia, voting is carried out using marbles. The method was introduced in 1965 to deal with illiteracy.[36] Polling stations contain metal drums painted in party colours and emblems with candidates' photos attached to them.[37][36] Voters are given a marble to place in the drum of their chosen candidate; when dropped into the drum, a bell sounds to register the vote. To avoid confusion, bicycles are banned near polling booths on election day.[36] If the marble is left on top of the drum rather than placed in it, the vote is deemed invalid.[38]

A similar system used in social clubs sees voters given a white ball to indicate support and a black ball to indicate opposition. This led to the coining of the term blackballing.

## See also

[edit]

* Class voting
* Cosmopolitan democracy
* Demeny voting
* Democratic mundialization
* Dollar voting
* Electoral fraud
* Electoral system
* Gerrymandering
* List of suffragists and suffragettes
* Mandate (politics)
* Opinion poll
* Political base
* Presidential election
* Proportional representation
* Psephology
* Ranked voting systems
* Ranked voting
* Redistricting
* Referendum
* Right of expatriates to vote in their country of origin
* Right to candidacy
* Single transferable vote
* Suffrage
* Suffragette
* Timeline of women's suffrage
* Universal suffrage
* Vote splitting
* Voter turnout
* Voting age
* Voting bloc
* Voting methods in deliberative assemblies
* Voting system

## References

[edit]

1. ^ "Voting". gov.uk. Archived from the original on 19 June 2019. Retrieved 9 June 2018.
2. ^ "Councillor Toronto Election 2014 Poll By Poll Results" (PDF). City of Toronto.
3. ^ Emerson, Peter (2016). From Majority Rule to Inclusive Politics: Electing a Power-Sharing Coalition (1st ed.). Cham: Springer International Publishing. ISBN 978-3-319-23500-4. OCLC 948558369.
4. ^ Karlsson Sjögren, Åsa, Männen, kvinnorna och rösträtten: medborgarskap och representation 1723–1866 [Men, women, and suffrage: citizenship and representation 1723–1866], Carlsson, Stockholm, 2006 (in Swedish).
5. ^ "How Did the Vote Expand? New Jersey's Revolutionary Decade". www.amrevmuseum.org. Retrieved 16 August 2024.
6. ^ "World suffrage timeline". nzhistory.govt.nz. Retrieved 8 March 2025.
7. ^ "New Zealand women and the vote – Women and the vote | NZHistory, New Zealand history online".
8. ^ "Constitution (Female Suffrage) Act 1895 (SA)". Documenting a Democracy, Museum of Australian Democracy. Retrieved 26 August 2024. Note: The South Australian Parliament passed the legislation in December 1894 but the Act did not gain royal assent and become law until February 1895.`{{cite web}}`: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
9. ^ Fenna, Alan; Robbins, Jane; Summers, John (2013). Government Politics in Australia. Pearson Higher Education AU. pp. 312–. ISBN 978-1-4860-0138-5.
10. ^ Documenting Democracy: Constitution (Female Suffrage) Act 1895 (SA); National Archives of Australia.
11. ^ Christine, Lindop (2008). Australia and New Zealand. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 27\. ISBN 978-0-19-423390-3. OCLC 361237847.
12. ^ Brief history of the Finnish Parliament. eduskunta.fi.
13. ^ "Centenary of women's full political rights in Finland". 20 July 2011. Archived from the original on 20 July 2011.
14. ^ Korpela, Salla (31 December 2018). "Finland's parliament: pioneer of gender equality". Finland.fi. Retrieved 7 October 2021.
15. ^ Sneider, Allison (2010). "The New Suffrage History: Voting Rights in International Perspective". History Compass. 8 (7): 692–703\. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00689.x. ISSN 1478-0542.
16. ^ Temkin, Moshik (22 January 2024). "Essential Elements for Turning a Cause into a Movement : Lessons from the Suffrage Struggle for Today's Activists". The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 24 February 2024.
17. ^ "Naked Swiss hikers must cover up". 27 April 2009.
18. ^ "Women's suffrage in Switzerland: 100 years of struggle". Federal Assembly. Federal Assembly.
19. ^ "Appenzell Inner Rhodes: The last Swiss canton to give women the vote". 2 February 2021.
20. ^ "The Landsgemeinde and Direct Democracy – the Swiss Spectator".
21. ^ Hume, Leslie (2016). The National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies 1897–1914. Routledge. p. 281\. ISBN 978-1-317-21326-0.
22. ^ "Women's National Anti-Suffrage League Manifesto" in Phelps, Edith M. (2013), Selected Articles on Woman Suffrage, London: Forgotten Books, pp. 257–259.
23. ^ (in French) Bruno S. Frey et Claudia Frey Marti, Le bonheur. L'approche économique, Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires romandes, 2013 (ISBN 978-2-88915-010-6).
24. ^ "The 'No Land, No House, No Vote campaign still on for 2009". Abahlali baseMjondolo. 5 May 2005. Archived from the original on 3 April 2008. Retrieved 3 November 2008.
25. ^ "IndyMedia Presents: No Land! No House! No Vote!". Anti-Eviction Campaign. 12 December 2005. Archived from the original on 25 April 2009.
26. ^ "Lupia and Mathew D. McCubbins, The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need To Know? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998". Review of Policy Research. 20 (2): 343–344\. June 2003. doi:10.1111/1541-1338.t01-1-00011. ISSN 1541-132X.
27. ^ Greene, Kesten C.; Armstrong, J. Scott; Jones, Jr., Randall J.; Wright, Malcolm (2010). "Predicting Elections from Politicians' Faces". Retrieved 2 November 2024.
28. ^ Graefe, Andreas & Armstrong, J. Scott (2010). "Predicting Elections from Biographical Information about Candidates" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 November 2011. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
29. ^ Garzia, Diego; Marschall, Stefan (2016). "Research on Voting Advice Applications: State of the Art and Future Directions". Policy & Internet. 8 (4): 376–390\. doi:10.1002/poi3.140. hdl:1814/45127.
30. ^ Leibenluft, Jacob (28 June 2008). "Why Don't Jehovah's Witnesses Vote? Because they're representatives of God's heavenly kingdom". Slate.
31. ^ "Statement of Doctrine". Archived from the original on 20 March 2023. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
32. ^ "Ask the Rabbis | Are We Commanded to Vote?". Moment Magazine. 6 May 2016. Archived from the original on 9 February 2023. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
33. ^ "CCC, 2240". Vatican.va. Retrieved 24 October 2024. "Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one's country...."
34. ^ "Illiterate voters: Making their mark". The Economist. 5 April 2014. Archived from the original on 5 April 2014. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
35. ^ "Statistics about Internet Voting in Estonia". Vabariigi Valimiskomisjon. Archived from the original on 22 March 2011. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
36. ^ a b c "Gambians vote with their marbles". BBC News. 22 September 2006. Archived from the original on 19 June 2019. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
37. ^ "Gambia vote a roll of the marbles". The Telegraph. Agence France-Presse. 30 November 2016. ISSN 0307-1235. Archived from the original on 28 June 2018. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
38. ^ "Voting with marbles in The Gambia". BBC News. BBC. Archived from the original on 20 March 2023. Retrieved 20 March 2023.

## External links

[edit]

Look up vote or voting in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Voting.

Scholia has a topic profile for Voting.

* An Excerpt From The Voting Rights Act of 1965
* Voting
* A history of voting in the United States from the Smithsonian Institution.
* A New Nation Votes: American Elections Returns 1787-1825 Archived 25 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine
* Can I Vote?—a nonpartisan US resource for registering to vote and finding your polling place from the National Association of Secretaries of State.
* Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Vote" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 28 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 216–217. This contains a brief history of voting in Ancient Greece and Rome; see also Electoral system s.v. History.
* The Canadian Museum of Civilization — A History of the Vote in Canada

Portal:

* Politics

Authority control databases

National|

* Germany
* United States
* Japan
* Czech Republic
* Latvia
* Israel

Other|

* Historical Dictionary of Switzerland
* NARA
* Yale LUX

*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template
*[US:]:
*[UK:]:
*[el.]:
*[Mdn.]:
*[NZ:]: