12

Voter turnout this year dipped to nearly its lowest point in two decades.

Voter turnout at 20-year low in 2016 - CNN, November 30, 2016

That would be remarkable.

I recalled this CNN article when someone recently argued that voter turnout was not only not low, but in fact increased in 2016, citing the United States Election Project. Now I don't which is true.

Is CNN's claim correct: was the voter turnout in 2016 the lowest for a presidential election in two decades?

1 Answer 1

25

No.

First, note that the third paragraph of the CNN article indicates that the claim is specific to presidential elections, not midterm or off-year, which typically have even lower turnout. This answer will thus focus solely on presidential elections.

Also note that "voter turnout" (as defined by the CNN article and anyone else who wants the numbers to be comparable across increases in population) is the percentage of voting-age citizens who cast a ballot, not the absolute number of votes cast.

Taking the above into account, then according to the FEC, the lowest voter turnout rate after 1996 was in 2000, with 51.21%. 2016's turnout rate of 55.67% exceeds the turnouts in both 2000 and 2012.

Breakdown of Voter Turnout over the Last 20 Years

The below information is sourced from the FEC's election results page, which has data for all federal elections back through 1982.

Table columns:

  • Votes: Total ballots cast in the popular vote
  • V.A. Pop.: U.S. Census Bureau Voting Age Population
  • Turnout: Percentage of Voting Age Population casting a vote for President
Year Votes V.A. Pop. Turnout
2016 136,669,276 245,502,000 55.67%
2012 129,085,410 235,248,000 54.87%
2008 131,313,820 225,499,000 58.23%
2004 122,295,345 [1] 215,694,000 56.70%
2000 105,396,641 [2] 205,815,000 51.21%
1996 96,277,223 [3] 196,511,000 48.99%

[1] Does not include "57,230 miscellaneous write-in, blank and void votes that were compiled as one total in New York"

[2] Does not include "138,216 miscellaneous write-in, blank and void votes that were compiled as one total in New York"

[3] Does not include "123,000 write-in and blank votes that were compiled as one total in New York"

Sources by year:

  • 2016 — PDF (page 5)
  • 2012 — PDF (page 5)
  • 2008 — PDF (page 5)
  • 2004 — PDF (page 5)
  • 2000 — PDF (page 11)
  • 1996 — PDF (page 11)
5
  • 8
    CNN has a note at the end that "The figures also do not include people of age who are ineligible to vote or have not registered." This makes it unclear whether the denominator in their percentage is actually all voting-age citizens, or only those who are registered to vote. I'd guess that the difference is significant. On the other hand, if that's the cause of the difference, you might also expect CNN to have a significantly different turnout figure for 2016, but in fact their figure is very close to yours. Commented Jun 28, 2020 at 11:46
  • 4
    It would be really nice to have an explanation as to how the discrepancy arose. Different definitions, different data sources, simple math error? Commented Jun 28, 2020 at 11:46
  • 1
    @NateEldredge I think you're right that they're using a different denominator, as referenced by your quote from the article. As to "you might also expect CNN to have a significantly different turnout figure for 2016, but in fact their figure is very close to yours," the article is also pretty clear that the number they give in it is not final, and that they expect it to increase (e.g. "As election officials go through outstanding ballots -- such as provisional ballots and those with write-ins -- the turnout figures will change."). Of course, then why report it's at a low if you don't know yet?
    – duckmayr
    Commented Jun 28, 2020 at 12:09
  • 3
    Both the FEC and CNN appear to be using voting age population (everyone over the age of 18) as the denominator, which is a poor measure of turnout since ineligible voters make up a sizable proportion of adults. The United States Election Project calculates a more accurate estimate of voter turnout by excluding ineligible voters from the denominator. As the question notes, this measure also shows an increase in 2016.
    – hichris123
    Commented Jun 28, 2020 at 15:55
  • 5
    @hichris123 Interesting. That seems bizarre that the FEC would use just the number of people 18 or older rather than the number of citizens 18 or older. Especially since the Census also keep statistics on citizen voting age population.
    – reirab
    Commented Jun 28, 2020 at 17:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .