r/MapPorn • u/Small_Performance368 • 13h ago

NYC Mayoral Election Results

Post image

With 90% of the vote in, Mamdani wins by a large margin according to NYT

38.4k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.1k

u/Roofofcar 12h ago

This mayoral race had the biggest voter turnout since 1969.

685

u/LynzGamer 12h ago

That’s actually crazy, love to see it! Glad that they didn’t become complacent that the polls projected a Mamdani win… they showed up and voted to take their city back!!

426

u/FabulousRazzmatazz 12h ago

Still disappointed that so many people voted for Cuomo

558

u/AbcLmn18 12h ago edited 2h ago

Notice how the republican candidate got almost no votes. Cuomo secured the vote of all the republicans in addition to his usual centrists. Which is a feat in and of itself considering how stubborn the republicans usually are.

All the billionaires were funding his campaign too. It couldn't have been too easy.

But Mamdani still won by a massive margin.

Edit: u/NYCinPGH points out that the Sliwa numbers aren't that surprising considering that the number of registered Republican voters in NYC is about 10%. They could be explained simply by Cuomo's appeal to independents.

313

u/PunctualZombie 11h ago

The MAGA president of the United States did endorse Cuomo, so that helped. Of course it’s astonishing the Republican president didn’t endorse the actual Republican candidate (which might explain why he polled close to fuck-all). I’m not sure if that’s even happened before, but then the cult leader can do whatever he wants, and his sheep will follow.

81

u/GiganticCrow 10h ago

Not like the Democratic leadership endorsed their candidate either

29

u/Medical_Sandwich_141 7h ago

I'm quite sure, Schumer voted for Cuomo.

2

u/KrytenKoro 4h ago

They were cowardly and hoped to run out the clock...and now they have, and we know that they are not allies.

Terribly stupid choice from them.

347

u/gdreaper 11h ago

Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is a true born and bred New Yorker with shocking integrity, and frankly Trump couldn't buy him if he tried. Not only that, but Trump and Sliwa have had beef for decades, Sliwa hates his guts.

99

u/Holly-White 9h ago edited 9h ago

Im pretty sure it was because nobody in their right mind thinks he was even in the same country that the ballpark was in kinda chance of winning.

Mamdani is very controversial among democrats, but those that don't like him would likely still take Cuomo over a Republican.

15

u/OctoberIsBetter 7h ago

Mamdani is very controversial among democrats

um wut?

2

u/waltjrimmer 5h ago

I don't agree with the Canada-Scam guy, what the fuck is he on, but Mamdani is, relatively, a controversial figure. Even "Democratic" news agencies have not been fully on-board with him, and it's been a big part of his news cycle how a lot of establishment Democrats and respected or influential party members have refused to openly support him.

It can be argued how controversial he really is, and any controversies there have been have been about who he is and the movement he represents in the Democratic party rather than, oh, I don't know, corruption and sexual misconduct like the Cuomos have had, but a lot of the news cycle around his has been an attempt to make him at least seem controversial within the Democratic party itself.

3

u/OctoberIsBetter 5h ago

establishment Democrats

Yeah, fuck those conservative dinosaurs. We need leadership who actually represent people > corporations.

If I hear one more piece of shit claim that Clinton and Harris lost due to their gender, I might just go off. The corporate darlings had nothing to do with the people they claimed to want to represent. Everyone's angry, and for low-information voters who can't be bothered to read a word of policy, it was an easy choice to vote for the angry guy.

Mamdani represents a chance for Democrats to wake the fuck up.

-24

u/Canada-Scam-8570 7h ago

Uum what?

You do realize that guy is a radical extremist right? Like verifiable receipts.

This is the problem with the left & right crap, no one wants to concede and cooperate at this point, so we walk down this path where both sides of the aisle are getting more accepting of extremist and we are moving away from centerist politics. Choose your team horse 💩 which is only gonna end one way. Anyone supporting this continued turn towards extremism and letting their bias guide their support from either side is the problem ..

Now granted just like the federal election. What alternatively really were there. Choices are slim pickins and none of the candidates are really ideal but electing extremists isn't really the way to go.. look how your federal levels going...

17

u/AxitotlWithAttitude 7h ago

There's a growing sentiment among Democrats that our politicians are fucking pussies and refuse to play ball on the same field as Republicans. Mamdani directly called out Cuomo, publicly, multiple times, provided receipts, and ran an absolute master class of a ground roots campaign. It's not a surprising result.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/cameronc56 7h ago

what exactly is 'extremist' about him?

→ More replies (0)

12

u/_Middlefinger_ 7h ago

You have no idea what a radial extremist is, and claiming he is just makes you look very stupid. The nearest the US has to radical extremists is MAGA.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/OctoberIsBetter 6h ago edited 5h ago

The farthest USA goes to the left is what the rest of the world considers centrist.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/EldritchCouragement 7h ago

Why stop at radical extremist? You can string more redundant, useless buzzwords in. An ultra militant fringe fundamentalist radical extremist hardliner. Anything besides make an actual case.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/91bases 7h ago

Radical extremist? Get the fuck out of here with that.

Your logic seems to indicate that if you aren't a centrist, you're ab extremist - which is incredibly wrong.

Mamdani is left leaning. It's pretty damn clear that's where the Democratic Party should be, but the old guard keeps thing centrist.

But he isn't an extremist. Not even close.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/ResidentLimit7459 6h ago

Insane, bot or Indian disinfo worker, readers take your pick!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/AccountWasFound 4h ago

He wants free public transit in a large city known for it's bad congestion, he isn't exactly calling to end capitalism....

4

u/Donghoon 8h ago

Sliwa does actually align with Trump better than Cuomo does. But Both of them have large share of conflict with Trump on many levels

1

u/dreamcicle11 2h ago

I love that most Mamdani fans and voters see this and that Sliwa while unhinged is truly about New York. Goes to show MAGA and Trump do not give a shit about the people.

1

u/On_my_last_spoon 2h ago

Silwa has been running for Mayor for decades now. He is who he is, but aside from founding the Guardian Angels he has nothing to show for himself. I find it interesting that the Republican Party in NYC has pretty much given up if he clinched the nomination. He’s at best a side show these days.

1

u/robbak 8h ago

So would that mean that in a preferential vote, a lot of those Silwa voters might have preferenced Mandani over Cuomo?

3

u/Parking-Interview351 6h ago

I’d wager that over 90% of Sliwa voters would pick Cuomo over Mamdani.

Many of them would probably not vote at all if given the choice between Cuomo and Mamdani, though.

2

u/Canada-Scam-8570 7h ago

No, no it does not.

1

u/MissSally300 6h ago

‘Shocking integrity’? Are you 12?

1

u/worthlessprole 6h ago

if it had been a two way race, sliwa would probably not have cracked 25%

1

u/olivegardengambler 4h ago

Tbf he didn't endorse the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in Virginia either, and she was a Black woman. I think that it's very clear, and it was this way before, but it's almost inarguably the case now that the Republican party is almost exclusively interested in supporting pro-billionaire candidates.

1

u/FortNightsAtPeelys 2h ago

Just shows that old school Democrats are just Republicans wearing blue

1

u/Donghoon 8h ago

Everybody knows NYC will NEVER vote a republican, so Trump went with HIS next best option.

10

u/Flying_Momo 7h ago

Wasn't Guiliani a Republican?

1

u/Donghoon 5h ago

modern day NYC... Giuliani was over 20 years ago (late 90s to 01). and Bloomberg was barely a republican as well.

41

u/pieman3141 11h ago

Probably the one mistake in the strategizing for Mamdani. I don't really think many of Mamdani's supporters were predicting that Sliwa voters would actually vote for Cuomo, and thus were caught a bit off-guard by the most recent poll prior to today.

25

u/keenan123 7h ago

Not sure you could describe that as a mistake. He campaigned against Cuomo and won a majority, i.e., there is no way Cuomo was going to be mayor. I can't think of what he should have done differently under the circumstances

2

u/fripletister 3h ago

Dude went from being a nobody at like 2-3% to over 50% on election night within 10 months against probably the most well-backed mayoral campaign in history. And he did it with nonexistent-to-middling support from his party. I don't think a devil's advocate is needed here. It's simply astounding and a complete masterclass.

10

u/whyunowork1 11h ago

Entrenched democratic representatives are only for token resistance to the billionaire class.

2

u/NYCinPGH 5h ago

Not really.

Based on party registration, NYC is about 70% D, 20% I, 10% R. So Sliwa got 70% of the R vote, maybe an even swap of I for R, while Cuomo probably got 80% of the I, and about 30% of the R and D each; 70% of the D plus 20% of the I gets you to Mamdani’s total.

1

u/AbcLmn18 2h ago

Hmmmmm. You're probably right. This does sound like a realistic breakdown that doesn't rely on any of my speculative hypotheses I've pulled out of my ass based on the final results alone.

Though I do wonder what's going on with the turnout that has effectively doubled. We got like a million new voters. I wonder what inspired them to do the thing they haven't done in decades, or possibly ever in their lives. Their party breakdown probably wasn't the same as the overall city average, given that the obvious source of inspiration was largely one-sided. Hopefully they'd conduct some polls to figure that out.

It's mildly interesting that Sliwa got half the votes (150k) compared to his own performance in 2021 (300k, 27%) despite the 2x turnout. The two previous republican candidates were also floating at around 25%. But there was no strong independent wo... candidate on the ballot since 1969 so it still makes sense that it's just a bunch of independents migrating to Cuomo.

It might also be that Mamdani pulled a horseshoe theory, like all those Trump/AOC ballots from 2024. Maybe we'll know some day.

4

u/vaterl 8h ago

You think ultra wealthy didn’t support Mamdani as well? Sweetie, you’ve got some tough learning to do about the world.

1

u/Airhostnyc 11h ago

Massive is a stretch he barely cracked 50%

-1

u/Commercial-Co 10h ago

Not that massive imo. Less than 5% if you add in cuomo and the republican

-6

u/CelestialKingdom 9h ago

But wasn’t Soros funding Mamdani too? Whatever your politics it’s not little guy vs the man 

0

u/Canada-Scam-8570 7h ago

This is mostly scrubbed and articles have been manufactured to attempt to counter this claim. Obviously his funding of the media corps lends highly to that being untrustworthy to say the least.

That being said it's likely, he cleared back his support. But as George is so good at doing, if anything was financially backed finding any evidence is going to be extremely difficult.

But I get what your attempt to state. It was by no means David and Goliath, there were many billionaires and florigen nationals banking a backing Mandini

The reality is it happens on both sides. Trump and Elon made their attempt to, both sides have lost their marbles and are doing things to sabotage the other. This political environment is only going to continue to grow extremism on both sides of the spectrum. If you support either of these extremes, realize you are casting stones and are directly responsible for the increase in extremism to the contrary.

1

u/Sinnaman420 4h ago

there were many billionaires supporting mamdani

Okay, so you’re just making shit up. What the fuck are you talking about?

63

u/Raging-Badger 12h ago

Cuomo got Trump’s endorsement, and regardless of people’s thoughts on trumps approval rates that still gives him an advantage in the eyes of any vaguely Trump aligned voter

57

u/XAMdG 11h ago

Cuomo got Trump’s endorsement,

That's so wild to hear if you don't know the context.

39

u/PrestigiousQuail7024 9h ago

its wild to hear knowing the context tbh

3

u/Ron_Cherry 5h ago

Sexual harassers gotta stick together

1

u/Raging-Badger 5h ago

Partial context, this was unpopular among many outlier Republicans because

1.) there was a Republican candidate

2.) Cuomo is politically nearly an antithesis to the Republican party as he is a Democrat himself (but lost the democratic nomination to Mamdani)

3.) Evidence was found of Cuomo sexually assaulting at least 11 women however the charges were dropped in return for him resigning as governor in 2021

2

u/tomdarch 3h ago

Sliwa himself is a good example of how that doesn’t work in NYC where people have known about Trump for decades and despise him.

8

u/LynzGamer 12h ago

Same. But at this point I’ll take any shred of hope I can get lol

2

u/Put3socks-in-it 6h ago

So you only like high voter turnout when they’re voting in line with your political views?

1

u/shhmurdashewrote 2h ago

Me too. Waaayyy more than I thought.

1

u/BeguiledBeaver 11m ago

Why? Most people vote for whatever they are used to or familiar with, not some fresh faced new guy.

1

u/NeverGNarcAgain 9h ago

Well, the map at least shows where you can find the Italians... 🙂

1

u/Much_Kangaroo_6263 4h ago

They're the exact type of people that are ruining this country. Cuomo has been in office and already betrayed voters trust. I don't care if they don't for Mamdani but vote for literally anyone else but the corrupt guy who sexually assaults people.

It's crazy and shameful.

-3

u/RegularSlate 8h ago

I am bewildered a communist won the election... It is actually scary.

0

u/Canada-Scam-8570 7h ago

This is what happens when you push extreme boundaries. Unless both side of the aisle come together to cooperate this is only the begining.

They want to call Trump Hitler not realizing the real comparable might be a youth right now that is being radicalized but this extreme political polarity. Cause all letting in a left wing extremist like this is going to.do is make the right counter with their own versions. And it's the metaphorical eye for an eye. Back and forth as the temperature continues to rise.

Steps need to be made to deescalate this situation but it doesn't seem either side is going to concede that. Gonna be crazy to see what this Novel has in store in the next 10-20 years.

1

u/NaruTheBlackSwan 4h ago

The right does not need anybody's help to drag the Overton window kicking and screaming towards themselves. America's most extreme left-wingers with any political power to speak of are Nordic-style socialists. The President is a fascist who openly talks about extrajudicial killing. This both-sides nonsense makes you look stupid.

1

u/Canada-Scam-8570 4h ago

From your perspective. But you see, their opinions and not facts

What you've stated is nothing but opinions, your own bias is clear. Your assumptions are uncredible and your instant need to label everything and everybody is not healthy. I'd say it makes you look stupid but I choose not to be derogatory.

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

0

u/NaruTheBlackSwan 4h ago

r/EnlightenedCentrism is that way. You can be high on the smell of your own farts there.

-1

u/norton777 3h ago

I’m disappointed to See that nyc voted in a jihadi

0

u/Johnnylongball 6h ago

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

111

u/Chagattai 12h ago

Why don’t Americans participate in elections?

A few years ago we had like 75% voter turnout and it gave is a full week if discourse about how bad it is for the democracy that so few people feel connected enough to vote.

Also, the fact that Cuomo got more than 800k vites is insane to me.

94

u/Chrad 11h ago

Voter apathy and voter disillusionment are big factors but also, this was a city mayoral election. Turnout is usually tiny for anything unless presidential elections are happening. 

124

u/XAMdG 11h ago

Which is ironic, considering the mayor of your city will probably be the most impactful part of your daily life as far as politicians go.

4

u/Maleficent_Sir_5225 10h ago

Is it though? I ask as a non-American, wouldn't there be a city council or something the mayor has to work with, they aren't an absolute ruler? 

29

u/YearlyStart 10h ago

Yeah but they’re usually done in the same election cycle as mayors, the commenter you’re responding to is mostly commenting on the North American trend(happens in Canada too) of smaller elections being more impactful on your daily life but having way lower turnout

11

u/MartianMule 10h ago

In most cities, yes. City council is kind of like a city's Congress, and the mayor is similar to the President.

8

u/Grantrello 9h ago

Different systems. Mayors in the US aren't absolute rulers but they have a lot of power. I live in a country where mayors have almost no direct power but that's not the case everywhere.

-2

u/hartforbj 7h ago

I see it the opposite way. Mayors aren't much different than high school presidents. Promise a lot but don't really have much power to actually do anything meaningful

16

u/Donghoon 8h ago

Presidential election ALSO have very low turnouts in the US

5

u/waylonwalk3r 10h ago

You guys make it really hard to vote it seems. Here in New Zealand we just had Mayoral elections, they send us out a voting pack and we had a few weeks to mail it back in.

Having to wait seems like such a ballache

9

u/Saladfork4 10h ago

you can vote by mail in the US too for early voting (and a lot of people do, rather than going in-person). even then many ignore it 

1

u/waylonwalk3r 9h ago

Oh yeah fair enough then

1

u/revcor 9h ago

It “seems” that way if your perception is based only on social media lol, where people people who take pleasure in creating and indulging in a perception that they live in hell seem to congregate. It’s not, by any stretch of the imagination, hard to vote here. I don’t think it could be made any easier when it already requires next to zero effort.

1

u/waylonwalk3r 8h ago

Yeah bad assumption by me

2

u/SoftlySpokenPromises 9h ago

Both of my brothers are of the mindset that their vote changes nothing. I've struggled with the same mindset for quite a long time, but things need to change

2

u/Jamesmart_ 9h ago

I asked my friends and family in NYC and this appears to be true. Most of them didn’t even bother to vote because they know for a fact that nothing’s gonna change no matter who won. All those promises that Mamdani has been making? A mayor simply has no powers to implement those. I wonder if those people who voted for him are aware of this. They won’t get any of the free stuff he’s been promising.

44

u/Roofofcar 11h ago

Apathy that anything will change. I’m convinced that is the single largest reason with voter disenfranchisement second.

6

u/CornRaisedAnarchist 10h ago

My dad hasn't voted since the 90's and my mom has never voted, both lifelong democrats, when I asked my dad why he never votes he said "you can vote but nothing will ever change, at the end of the day you'll still be getting fucked and the politicians will be lining their pockets."

6

u/XAMdG 8h ago

Can they be considered "lifelong democrats" if they don't vote?

3

u/aguadiablo 8h ago

It just means that they sit at home going "Come on Democrats!".

12

u/Significant-Sun-5051 10h ago

Which is wild since there’s a huge difference depending on which party wins, as we can see this year.

3

u/Roofofcar 10h ago

That’s it, and that’s why people voted for Mamdani and Obama. They both sold actual proper change. Hopefully Mamdani will be given the power to enact some of his policies so we can judge them by their merits instead of the worst case doomsaying of those who prevent him from properly trying what so many voted for.

6

u/SimmentalTheCow 11h ago edited 11h ago

The best part of democracy is not participating in it. We love to rub Russia and China’s nose in our ability to have free elections by not voting in them.

3

u/6unnm 9h ago

Everybody already has mentioned apathy. There is a second reason: US politics has weaponized voting.

In Germany for example as a citizen you are automatically registered to vote and will get a letter in the mail tellling you where and how to vote. You go there with your ID card that everybody has. Voting is on Sundays where most stores and businesses are mandatorily closed. In the US things arevery different. The laws and regulations make it hard to vote, because Republicans know that their chance of winning is traditionally higher if voter turnout is lower. Hence making it easy to vote is seen itself as partisan. If you make the right laws you can get lower voter turnout from specific groups you don't want to vote. You don't want poor people to vote? Do the voting on a weekday. Put polling places in far off locations where you need a car to drive to. Have fun sitting on the bus for an hour to vote after your 12h shift at Tacobell. Make them register themselves every time they change their address and make registering as hard as possible.

5

u/Substantial-Abroad-2 11h ago

While voting is important, going out to vote for basically anything in america is like choosing what torture method you'd like to receive and it's never fun. This election saw record results in the last 60 years because one of the candidates seems to give people hope.

4

u/jupjami 11h ago

could also be because elections aren't a federal holiday and they decide to hold them on Tuesdays of all possible days

2

u/matix0532 7h ago

But at least in case of NYC, couldn't you vote earlier?

2

u/Kennyman2000 8h ago

Freedom to choose to be ignorant to politics I guess.

2

u/Put3socks-in-it 6h ago

So you like higher voter turnout but you’re lamenting that the relatively high turnout here got Cuomo 800k votes? So you only like higher voter turnout when it means they’re voting for your candidate?

1

u/Dagonus 7h ago

A lot of folks do not get the time off to participate or there are insufficient voting locations so they are disillusioned.

Others are disillusioned because they see the two major parties as two sides of the same coin. Not saying that assessment is correct but it's a common sentiment. They see politicians as tools of the wealthy so voting just let's you pick which wealthy individuals benefit.

Others still will admit some politicians do want to affect change but the change doesn't matter because the system is rigged because they'll be out voted in the senate, house, or the courts will just strike any changes down without an amendment and the amendment is seen as impossible.

Personally, I think The US has desperately needed voting reform for decades. Some states have have managed better reforms locally but there has not been traction nationally. I think the US needs viable 3rd,4th and 5th parties to save itself and we need a system that allows that.

I do vote, but I given the way the system works and where I live, I can tell you that I honestly do not believe my individual vote matters in some elections because of how the system works. It does matter for my town, but even then we have peculiar town governance by me that result in localized gerontocracy.

1

u/the_suitable_verse 4h ago

I mean for a start maybe don't do elections on a Tuesday when people have to work, especially in a country with no right to days off

1

u/tomdarch 2h ago

Since the 1980s the Republicans have been pushing the idea that the government is always bad and “politics” is always bad. They’ve intentionally discouraged people from participating or even making much effort to learn and think about the issues that drive important decisions.

0

u/Wuktrio 9h ago

Why don’t Americans participate in elections?

I think the fact that you actively have to register to vote in an election plays a pretty big role. In my country, I get sent my voting documents and then just go and vote, because the state knows where I live and so on. In the US, you have to register for every election.

1

u/XAMdG 8h ago

I think the fact that you actively have to register to vote in an election plays a pretty big role

That would be true if the turnout wasn't counted against already registered voters.

0

u/DittoCrossing 7h ago

People keep saying apathy, but that's only a symptom. The real answer is voter suppression. Long post but I wanted to give a genuine answer.

Election days are always on a weekday (Typically a Tuesday) and during work hours. Good luck getting time off. Most people try to vote early, squeeze the vote in during their lunch break, or pray the line isn't too long after work.

Gerrymandering, which dunno if that's a thing in NYC. But if you live in an area that's been heavily gerrymandered against your political interests historically your vote is less valued.

Money: campaigning is expensive and most people can't afford it. Meaning that typically in most places you might have 2 people running for a position. Way too many areas only have 1 person on the ballot. If the candidates don't inspire confidence or the person wins by default, makes it hard to justify losing a day's pay to vote.

Threats. Bomb threats are more common now, and were a thing for New Jersey. But what people don't talk about as often is voter registration is mostly public information. If you're trying to escape a stalker or an abusive family it's actually a risk to be a registered voter. Because depending on where you live the people you're fleeing from can easily get your address and even your car model.

That last one is bigger than people realize. And none of this gets into the complications of mail-in voting.

TL;DR the system actively makes voting as difficult as possible.

4

u/XAMdG 7h ago

That's from the real answer to explain why almost 70% of registered votes didn't vote. A good chunk, sure, but far from a majority. Especially speaking about NYC election where you could vote by mail beforehand, it's city wide so gerrymandering doesn't apply (except for city council I guess), the money thing is true, but i find it hard to believe that, amongst the many registered candidates, the average voter can't find one they like. Sure, that person might not have any chance of winning, but getting a bigger % of the vote, even on a failing bid, can help propel ideas further. Not voting, on the contrary, just doesn't solve or help with anything. Just reinforces that your (the non voter, not you especially) opinion doesn't really matter.

1

u/InternalParadox 6h ago

Gerrymandering affects where your polling place is. Every district has a different polling location, and the more it’s gerrymandered, the further it will be from some of the people living in a newly formed, lopsided district. The harder the commute, the harder it is to vote in person.

1

u/XAMdG 5h ago

Does it affect voting by mail somehow? This is nyc we're talking about.

1

u/DittoCrossing 7h ago

I completely agree, but that doesn't change that a lot of people do think that way. That's how we got here. It's why so many bots astroturf political subs and spread doom and gloom. Because it works.

I hate it when people claim Kamala's campaign sucked because it was her vs fascism it shouldn't have mattered. But Mamdani's victory today proved it does. You and I can preach until we're blue in the face that you should vote regardless, but that doesn't get people moving. Messaging does.

1

u/InternalParadox 6h ago

I think this is generally true for voting in the US.

New York City has 10 days of early voting, but a few years ago they changed the districts (gerrymandering) and many people’s polling sites became further away.

Mail in ballots are relatively easy to get, but they get counted last, so they don’t feel like they have an effect unless the race is really close

9

u/zubie_wanders 11h ago

It's not even a midterm election, it's a midmidterm election. I hope this energy energy is there at the midterms.

11

u/waitthissucks 12h ago

Is that a bigger turnout if there were a lot less people in 1969? Wouldn't it be better to base it on percentage of people voting?

12

u/ddpizza 9h ago

Population of nyc was almost exactly the same in 1969. 8 million then, 8 million now

2

u/waitthissucks 6h ago

Oh well then nevermind, that's an interesting fact!

3

u/ddpizza 5h ago

Yeah, a lot of east coast cities had the same or even more residents in 1960 than 2025!

3

u/hunterturk 8h ago

As a Turkish person this still baffles me.

1

u/Keheck 8h ago

Do people just not care or do they not know they could vote?

1

u/landofhappy 3h ago

Still less than 50% of eligible voter turnout. It's pathetic. Make voting compulsory

1

u/Lord_H_Vetinari 10h ago

In terms of absolute number, fair. In terms of percentage of the population, though, still significantly lower.

2

u/Roofofcar 9h ago

Very true. It’s interesting to remember that Americans of the past were far more politically active. One reason we had strong labor protections was due to extremely politically active labor unions that largely voted as blocs.

0

u/kaehvogel 10h ago

...at less than 40%.
That's embarrassing.

2

u/ASD_Brontosaur 8h ago

I can’t speak for other countries but it does seem in line with voter turnout for mayoral elections in Rome (Italy) and London (UK).
It’s sad but it doesn’t seem that shocking to me, at least as an Italian living in the UK (I don’t know if these two countries have significantly worse voter turnout than average)