In democracies with compulsory voting, such as Australia and many Latin American countries, the overwhelming majority of voters cast their ballots in every election. However, in the United States, where voting is voluntary, participation tells a very different story. Although voter turnout in the 2020 U.S. presidential election reached 67%, the highest since 1900, this is still significantly lower compared to countries with mandatory voting systems. Historically, voter turnout in U.S. presidential elections has fluctuated between 50% and 65%, with non-voters playing a pivotal role in determining election outcomes.
In many ways, the decision to stay home on Election Day is not a passive act but an active one. In the United States’ unique Electoral College system, victory does not hinge solely on the popular vote but on winning key battleground states. Consequently, voters who choose not to vote, especially in swing states, may inadvertently help the candidate they least prefer by withholding support from their preferred candidate. This dynamic makes non-voters one of the most consequential factors in American elections.
U.S. Electoral College: Where Non-Voters Matter
In most democracies, the candidate who wins the most votes wins the election. However, the U.S. uses the Electoral College, a system that assigns electoral votes based on state victories rather than the national popular vote. As a result, candidates focus on winning key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Florida, and Wisconsin, where electoral votes are up for grabs, and elections are often decided by slim margins.
In these battleground states, turnout is critical. The winner takes all electoral votes, regardless of whether they win by 10 votes or 10,000. This “winner-takes-all” system makes every vote crucial—and non-votes even more impactful. When voters stay home, they effectively remove a vote from their preferred candidate, giving an advantage to their opponent. As one political scientist put it, “The couch is where Americans go to vote against their self-interest.”
Partisanship and Voter Behavior: A Nation Deeply Divided
The United States is deeply divided along partisan lines. According to the latest surveys, about 30% of Americans identify as Republican, 30% identify as Democrat, and the remaining 40% describe themselves as independent. However, decades of research reveal that many so-called “independents” lean heavily toward one of the two major parties. About half of independents lean Republican, while the other half lean Democrat. This polarization makes every vote matter more, particularly in swing states.
One of the most telling predictors of voter turnout is dissatisfaction with the candidates. According to recent Gallup Poll data, 9% of Republicans hold an unfavorable view of Donald Trump, while only 5% of Democrats feel similarly about Kamala Harris. This dissatisfaction can have a significant impact on voter behavior. When voters are disillusioned with their own party’s candidate, they are more likely to stay home, effectively removing themselves from the political equation.
GOP’s Dilemma: Disaffected Voters and the “Trump Fatigue” Factor
In 2016, Trump pulled off a surprising victory by persuading certain disaffected Democrats—particularly white working-class voters in the Rust Belt—to either stay home, vote for a third-party candidate, or vote for him. Fast forward to 2024, and the Trump campaign faces a different challenge: keeping disillusioned Republicans on his side. Suburban women, veterans, and traditional Republicans have expressed dissatisfaction with Trump, particularly on issues like reproductive rights, national security, and his polarizing temperament.
The Trump campaign is acutely aware of this risk. At a recent rally in New York, Trump urged his supporters to “get your fat ass out of the couch” to vote for him, signaling his recognition that apathy among his base could be detrimental. Should these Republican voters decide to stay home on Election Day, Harris could gain a decisive advantage in battleground states.
Harris and Democrats: Can They Keep the Momentum?
While Trump is dealing with disillusionment within his base, the Democrats face their own challenges. The 2020 election saw a surge in voter turnout, particularly among young voters, minority groups, and suburban women—demographics that largely favored the Democrats. However, maintaining this momentum in 2024 is no small feat.
The Harris campaign has actively courted various voter blocs, from the Taylor Swift-inspired “Swifties” to the “Never Trumpers” to veterans of foreign wars. Harris’ challenge is to energize these groups while simultaneously convincing disaffected Republicans to stay home.
A critical factor in this strategy is voter turnout. Historically, higher voter turnout has benefited Democrats, but recent trends suggest this may no longer be the case. Since 2016, research shows that higher turnout rates have started to favor Republicans. This reversal poses a challenge for the Democratic Party, which has traditionally relied on mobilizing a broad coalition of voters to win elections.
Non-Voter Dilemma: A Crisis for Both Parties
Despite the growing political engagement in recent years, both parties still face a significant portion of their base that does not vote. According to the Pew Research Center, 46% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents did not vote in the past three elections (2018, 2020, and 2022). In comparison, 41% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents abstained from voting. These non-voters hold the power to swing elections, particularly in battleground states where margins are razor-thin.
For both Harris and Trump, convincing these non-voters to leave the couch and head to the polls is crucial. For Democrats, the challenge lies in energizing younger voters, minorities, and suburbanites who helped propel them to victory in 2020. For Republicans, the task is to keep their disaffected base from staying home, disillusioned by Trump’s controversial policies and polarizing personality.
Third Parties: Spoiler or Savior?
In addition to non-voters, third-party candidates can play a significant role in shaping the outcome of U.S. elections. In 2016, third-party candidates like Jill Stein of the Green Party and Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party siphoned votes away from both major candidates, particularly from Hillary Clinton. In swing states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, the margin of Trump’s victory was smaller than the number of votes cast for third-party candidates. This led some political analysts to argue that third-party voters indirectly handed Trump the presidency.
As 2024 approaches, there is speculation about whether a third-party candidate could once again tip the scales. While no major third-party candidate has emerged thus far, even a small fraction of the vote going to a third-party candidate could have significant ramifications, particularly in battleground states.
Battle for Battleground States: Where the Couch Matters Most
In the U.S. electoral system, not all votes are created equal. Voters in battleground states wield disproportionate power in determining the outcome of presidential elections. States like Florida, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have swung back and forth between Democratic and Republican candidates in recent elections, making them the focal point of campaign efforts.
In these states, voter turnout can make or break a candidate’s chances. In 2016, Trump’s victory in the Rust Belt states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania was largely due to his ability to mobilize disaffected working-class voters and convince others to stay home. In 2020, Biden flipped those states by successfully energizing minority voters, suburbanites, and young people.
As the 2024 election approaches, both parties are pouring resources into these battleground states. The goal is simple: get more people off the couch and to the polls. For Harris, that means energizing young voters, minorities, and suburban women. For Trump, it means convincing disillusioned Republicans to stick with him, despite their misgivings.
The power of non-voters in U.S. elections cannot be overstated. In a system where electoral votes, not the popular vote, decide the presidency, those who choose to stay home on Election Day effectively make a decision that can swing the outcome of the election. For both Harris and Trump, the battle to get voters off the couch is critical. Whichever candidate can mobilize their base and convince enough disillusioned voters to turn out will likely win the presidency.
Yet, the real tragedy is that many of those who stay home will get precisely what they don’t want. When the couch wins, America loses. Whether out of apathy, disillusionment, or dissatisfaction, non-voters are making a decision with profound consequences. As the 2024 election approaches, the fate of the nation may once again rest not in the hands of those who vote but in the hands of those who don’t.
