Talk:Election

message: How is it possible that Popular vote redirects here, without this article mentioning it at all? Stolsvik (talk) 12:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular vote

message: Anyone want to clean up the "Who is voted for" section?  It reads terrible and has really weak grammar.
:I agreed, and I did so.  Ataru 14:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: . ADmo1R (talk) 09:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: may ADmo1R (talk) 09:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

text: This is a very good article...Someone want to post it for Featured Article Candidates?
It may not be perfect, but it has the best description and elaboration of the concept of the loyal opposition I have EVER seen.
Bravo, folks. -Penta 17:35, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc

message: At what level of non-voter turnout would an election be deemed invalid, or not providing a meaningful result?
: Depends on the country. I know that it's 50% in Serbia. Not that I live there :-) Wouter Lievens 22:19, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Voter turnout

message: Dictatorships, such as the former Soviet Union, have been known to hold such show elections.
Is the USSR such a good example for this? It had a dictatorship of the proletariat, but I assume this denomination was rather tongue in cheek. There may have been show elections (I don't really know), but it's certainly not a good example of a dictatorship (wasn't it more of an oligarchy?). Maybe some Latin American country would be a better example.
In the 'fixed vote' type of show-election such elections may offer several candidates for each office.
How is that a show election? Sounds pretty normal to me.
In the 'single candidate' type of show-election, there may only be one candidate for any one given position, with no alternative choices for voters beyond voting yes or no to this candidate.
Isn't that more of a referendum? Just not the type most of us will be used to, but it seems to fit the definition.
In both cases, the government uses intimidation or vote-rigging to ensure a high yes vote or that only the government-approved candidates are chosen.
Now that's what I'd call a show election. It's rigged. But a yes/no vote isn't quite necessarily rigged.
Further on, it is suggested that Hitler came to power thanks to plurality voting. But I don't see how this could help overthrow democracy because one might still need an absolute majority. Unless it's combined with a 'winner take all' system like in the USA. But I understand that that's not what happened. The Nazis used undemocratic means they called gleichschaltung.
::That is not true. In the Weimar republic, the chancellor was elected by the Reichstag and not by popular vote (which Hitler could not win either): Hitler's party did NOT get a majority. Actually the NSDAP only received 37% in 1932. This made them the strongest party in the Reichstag, but they did not have the simple majority to elect a chancellor from their ranks. Also that year, Hitler lost the direct election for Reichspresident to Hindenburg, who received 53% and Hitler 36%. Hindenburg dissolved the Reichstag, and in the 1933 election the NSDAP lost considerably, but remained strongest party with 33%. Hitler became chancellor because the christian center party broke their promise to fight against Hitler, and voted for him in the Reichtstag, betraying their voters, so together with the conservatives' votes Hitler got elected.2001:A61:B42:9201:749B:AB76:8A9F:6431 (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Show elections 

message: Does anyone think the top picture (:Image:Election_Poster_Board.jpg) is a bit obscure? It's not obvious how it relates to elections; I surmise election candidates stick their posters on it?  Or are results posted on it?  In any case, something easy, like people queueing at a ballot box, might be simpler. Joestynes 00:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. :Image:Votingwomen.jpg is a good picture of people voting. :Image:SI-CampaignSigns.JPG is colourful and easy to understand. - SimonP 00:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Other states (e.g., the United Kingdom) only set maximum time in office, and the executive decides exactly when within that limit it will actually go to the polls. In practice this means the government will remain in power full term unless something special happens, such as a motion of no-confidence.
As I understand it, it is quite rare for a Parliament to sit out its full term in the UK, because the Prime Minister usually calls an election at a time deemed opportune for the Government's electoral fortunes. In fact, contrary to what the article says, delaying an election right to the five-year term is often considered a sign of weakness ("waiting for something to come up", like Micawber). An example of this would be John Major's hanging on after the narrow victory of 1992 all the way until 1997. I think this part needs rewriting. Any suggestions? Tamino 16:08, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK Parliamentary term 

message: I removed the sentence on Victor Berger from the "Bias and limited options" section.  Not only is it a single-person example in a section covering systemic forces and biases, but Berger had been convicted under the espionage act (later overturned) at the time the House denied him his seat.  Whatever their actual motivation, a legislative body unseating a member for a criminal conviction is not necessarily the same thing as simply "denying him his seat because of his anti-war views".  Note that Berger was able to make the ballot and win the subsequent special election. - David Oberst 17:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Victor Berger

message: Greetings all. I just wrote the page Election surprise, and was wondering if some of you could pop in, and tweak the page up some. I'm looking for maybe:
*a bit more clarification,
*more incidents worldwide which would qualify as election surprises
*categories
Thanks! samwaltz 00:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Election surprise]]

message: Hello, can you please add "Electoral Geography" website to the external links section? I really think this website will be useful for everybody interested in elections.
http://www.electoralgeography.com/en/index.html
62.141.71.65 08:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Electoral Geography"

message: It would be good some mention about what early elections are, as they are not unusual in Europe, for example. Mountolive | Talk 08:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Snap election is probably a synonym. --Helenalex 22:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I think it's advance poll that's referred to. --Vuo 13:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early elections 

message: I tagged the Difficulties with Elections section with a NPOV tag, because in my opinion it reads like someone's high school essay on what is wrong with democracies, including conspiracy theories about corporations being behind both major parties in the United States. I didn't want to take the radical action of completely removing it although I don't think it would be unwarranted. The "Voter frustration and apathy" section especially needs a major rewrite or deletion. I would point out that it doesn't offer any citations or references but nothing else in the article does either. Gudeldar 22:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and hacked out a good part of that section. - SimonP 13:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this section empty; I added a summary of electoral fraud and removed the NPOV tag. -- Beland (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Validentity For Both Harvard And Yale. 2 For 1 Cambridge Is Thin. 67.60.241.118 (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagged with NPOV 

message: For one reason or another, someone has moved the article "popular vote" to "election." "Election" is far too broad a topic. There is an article about electoral colleges and electoral votes, for example, and yet no one that describes the popular votes in say U.S. presidential elections, the history behind the popular vote, and why it is still used even though it does not directly affect the election of a president in the U.S. There are also the issues relating to popular votes and that they have been used in other government's systems. "Popular vote" should have its own page as the page "election" really gives limited information on that topic (therefore, it was also unwise that the two were merged in the first place). Wolfdog (talk) 03:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split to Popular Vote 

message: I've occasionally heard religious people use the term "election" to describe a facet of their beliefs, but I haven't ever seen it adequately explained. I'm at a loss as to finding more information, since searching for "religion" and "election" brings up results that are entirely unrelated. The reason I bring it to the attention of this talk page is that if there is such a belief, whatever it is, that article may need to be created and this page disambiguated. I'm still entirely unsure of how notable and documentable the religious idea of 'election' is, though. All I know is that it may have something to do with protestant Calvinism. I don't have anything else of value to add, so does anyone else? Is this even worth pursuing? 67.127.55.234 (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Try Calvinism or predestination. There is a reference link to the latter at the top of the article already - David Oberst (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Election' in a wholly religious context? 

message: The above tag has been sitting around for a while.  Can anyone name any specific areas which need expansion, or can this request be considered filled? -- Beland (talk) 16:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion

message: Getting Started
    * Am I Registered?
    * Request a Voter Registration Application
      Last day to have Registered to Vote for the
      November 4th General Election was October 6, 2008
    * Military & Overseas VotersVoter Questions (FAQ)
General Voter Information
    * Voter Information: Comprehensive Information for Voters
    * Early Voting: October 20th - 31st
    * Military/Overseas Voters
          o New Military and Overseas Voter Services
    * Student Voters
    * Voters With Special Needs
    * New Election Procedures and Information Following Hurricane Ike
Candidates And Important Dates
    * What Is on the Ballot
    * November 4, 2008 Election Law Calendar
    * Important Dates Regarding the November 4, 2008 Election  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marjt711 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the Elections Division 

message: There is a need to create a lot of disambigs based on :Category:Elections by year (see for example elections in 1848 / 1848 elections ) and so on). I created a bunch but 100+ are missing. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  19:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambigs needed 

message: Elections may occur in a joint-stock company, in military, in a church, in an international organization etc. For example, the Pope is elected as well as th Secretary-General of the UN and the head of Microsoft. This article misses the point.--MathFacts (talk) 08:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elections are not only by population 

message: It seems to me that the usage, at Wikipedia, of the term "democratically-elected government" is biased in a leftist and (ironically) anti-democratic way. Nearly every reference I can recall seeing to this phrase asserts that the following sequences of conditions or actions took place:
* There was a "democratic" election
* The result was "democracy"
* Some evil, outside group overthrew this government, disregarding the will of the people
* (Often this evil outside group is designated as the USA or some part of its government like the CIA)
* The result of this intervention was genocide and/or poverty
Now I admit I don't have an exhaustive list of quotes, but I hope a few other contributors will assume good faith and look around with me. The bias is there and should be rooted out.
However, don't make the mistake of thinking I want to replace this bias with the equal and opposite error of saying that no democratically-elected government has ever been overthrown, or that America has never trampled on political freedom. 
But I would like to clarify what Democracy means in the context of elections. For example, did someone run unopposed and get 99.8% of the vote? Generally, this is not considered democracy. Or is there so much lawlessness and violence in a country that opposition candidates run a terrible risk of assassination? Or were the voting results disputed, e.g., on the grounds that the ruling party did all the counting and cheated to stay in power?
This is relevant, because there are theories about democracy, freedom, prosperity and peace which depend on the definition of "democratically elected". Again, I am not advocating any particular one of these theories as a truth to inform all our articles. What I am advocating is that we replace the bias of (tacitly?) accepting one theory and dismissing others - with a description of all major published views even if they compete with the POV that most of our contributors believe in. 
If anyone is interested in this, I will elaborate. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Democratically elected governments

message: I don't understand the caption for the first picture.
"Leaves the second round of parliamentary elections in Iran election"
What is that supposed to mean? Tad Lincoln (talk) 06:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wild guess: leaf in the sense 'sheet of paper', i.e. "Ballots for ..." —Tamfang (talk) 00:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm guessing the same. EmGaGa (talk) 00:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caption 

message: There are a number of other articles, such as Elections Canada or Elections in Sweden, which are not mentioned or referred to at all here, as if they did not exist. What can be done about that? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Very closely related articles not mentioned

message: Just asking. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are elections "free" if it is compulsory to vote? 

message: Who decides the fate of political representatives? 
A- president
B- voters
C- election Commission
D- none of these 2401:4900:5C5A:B8A0:0:0:823:D6E8 (talk) 15:18, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  S. St. ( civics) 

message: What's wrong with this?  User:FlightTime, please explain yourself, and also please explain why reverting such an edit qualifies as a minor edit.  122.150.71.249 (talk) 01:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I use edit summaries. Change it back if you want.   - FlightTime (open channel) 01:47, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Hello, I agree with the IP editor. I'd say that "one or more individuals" sounds more clear than "an individual or multiple individuals". I'd even support people in place of individuals, though I know there are a few dogs which hold mayoral titles. SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplifying introduction 

message: — Assignment last updated by SailordeSuisse (talk) 01:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Open Democracy

message: ADmo1R (talk) 05:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elections-DATA UPDATED 

message: In the sham elections in southern Ukraine, transparent ballot boxes were used. It was claimed that that symbolized the transparency and legitimacy of the process. Or could this have been a measure to control what people voted for? ◅ Sebastian 15:04, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transparent ballot boxes 

message: the pop-up that appears for this article when you click on the related link in another article on the Wikipedia Mobile app says "election Jimi," I don't know how to fix this. I don't know if it appears like this on the web version. Unrefined Gasoline (talk) 14:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  pop-up for this article 

message: Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has operated since the 17th century. Elections may fill offices in the legislature, sometimes in the executive and judiciary, and for regional and local government. This process is also used in many other private and business organisations, from clubs to voluntary associations and corporations.
The global use of elections as a tool for selecting representatives in modern representative democracies is in contrast with the practice in the democratic archetype, ancient Athens, where the elections were considered an oligarchic institution and most political offices were filled using sortition, also known as allotment, by which officeholders were chosen by lot.
Electoral reform describes the process of introducing fair electoral systems where they are not in place, or improving the fairness or effectiveness of existing systems. Psephology is the study of results and other statistics relating to elections (especially with a view to predicting future results). Election is the fact of electing, or being elected. 2409:40F4:101D:AF68:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 11:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election commission