Opinion polling for the 2017 Chilean general election

Last updated May 31, 2024

Opinion polling was carried out prior to the 2017 Chilean general elections.

President

Open-ended question

Question: "Who would you like to be the next president?" Full sample is shown, unless specified.

Polling firm	Field dates	MEO	Goic	Guillier	F Kast	JA Kast	Lagos	Mayol	Ossandón	Parisi	Piñera	Sánchez	Others	DK/NR	Error
Adimark	November 7–28, 2016	1%	1%	21%	1%		7%		4%		24%		10%	31%	3%
Criteria Research	November 28-December 7, 2016	2%		25%	0%	0%	4%		5%	2%	27%		35%		3.4%
CEP	November 25-December 23, 2016	1%		14%			5%		2%		20%		10%	49%	3%
CERC-Mori	December 7–15, 2016			14%			6%		3%		19%		57%		3%
Adimark	December 2–28, 2016	2%		26%			5%		4%		29%		11%	23%	3%
Criteria Research	December 27, 2016 – January 4, 2017	2%		27%		1%	2%		5%	2%	32%		22%	7%	3.4%
Adimark	January 6–25, 2017	1%	1%	28%		1%	5%		2%		27%		10%	25%	3%
Criteria Research	January 25-February 2, 2017	1%		28%			3%		5%	3%	28%		32%		3.4%
Adimark	February 2–28, 2017	1%	1%	25%	1%	1%	4%		2%	1%	29%		10%	25%	3%
Cadem	March 1–3, 2017	1%		17%			3%		3%	2%	25%		6%	43%	3.7%
Criteria Research	March 1–10, 2017	3%		25%			7%		4%	5%	23%		33%		3.4%
Cadem	March 8–10, 2017	1%	1%	17%	1%		2%		4%	2%	26%		6%	40%	3.7%
Adimark	March 3–28, 2017	2%	2%	23%	1%		3%		4%		27%	2%	7%	29%	3%
Cadem	March 15–17, 2017	1%	2%	16%	1%		2%	1%	3%	1%	24%		7%	42%	3.7%
Cadem	March 22–24, 2017	1%	3%	15%	1%		3%		3%	1%	25%	2%	4%	42%	3.6%
Cadem	March 29–31, 2017	1%	2%	16%	1%		4%		3%	1%	24%	4%	4%	40%	3.6%
CERC-Mori	March 28-April 10, 2017	2%		14%			4%		2%		24%	3%	2%	49%	3%
Cadem	April 5–7, 2017	2%	1%	15%			3%		3%	2%	26%	6%	3%	39%	3.6%
Criteria Research	April 4–11, 2017	2%		18%			2%		4%	6%	33%	11%	24%		3.4%
Cadem	April 12–13, 2017	1%	2%	17%			1%		3%	2%	24%	6%	3%	41%	3.6%
Adimark	April 3–25, 2017		2%	19%	1%		3%		2%	3%	24%	11%	6%	29%	3%
Cadem	April 20–21, 2017		2%	17%	1%				4%	1%	23%	6%	4%	42%	3.7%
Cadem	April 26–28, 2017		2%	16%	1%	1%			4%	3%	22%	6%	4%	41%	3.6%
Cadem	May 3–5, 2017	1%	3%	15%	1%				4%	2%	24%	8%	4%	38%	3.6%
Criteria Research	May 2–12, 2017			18%					9%	5%	30%	17%	15%	7%	3.4%
CEP	April 26-May 22, 2017	1.5%	2.1%	12.8%			1.5%		5.4%		23.7%	4.8%	7%	42%	3%
Cadem	May 10–12, 2017	1%	3%	15%	1%				4%	1%	24%	9%	3%	39%	3.7%
Adimark	May 3–29, 2017	2%	3%	21%	1%		1%		4%	1%	25%	11%	5%	26%	3%
Cadem	May 17–19, 2017	1%	3%	14%	1%	1%			4%	2%	26%	8%	4%	36%	3.6%
Cadem	May 24–26, 2017	1%	3%	13%				1%	4%	2%	24%	9%	4%	39%	3.7%
Cadem	June 1–2, 2017	1%	2%	14%	1%				4%	1%	24%	10%	5%	38%	3.7%
Criteria Research	June 1–11, 2017	2%	6%	17%					6%		29%	12%	19%	10%	3.4%
Cadem	June 7–9, 2017		1%	13%	1%			1%	5%		25%	9%	5%	40%	3.6%
Adimark	June 2–27, 2017	1%	2%	15%	3%	1%		3%	4%	1%	31%	13%	3%	23%	3%
Cadem	June 15–16, 2017	1%	2%	13%	2%			2%	6%	1%	25%	9%	5%	34%	3.6%
Cadem	June 21–23, 2017		2%	12%	3%			3%	6%	1%	24%	9%	6%	34%	3.6%
Cadem	June 28–29, 2017	1%	1%	9%	5%	1%		3%	7%	1%	22%	11%	4%	35%	3.6%
Cadem	July 5–7, 2017		1%	9%	1%	1%			2%	1%	30%	15%	5%	35%	3.7%
Adimark	July 4–26, 2017	1%	1%	16%	2%	1%	1%		2%	1%	32%	17%	4%	22%	3%
Adimark ^a	July 4–26, 2017	1%	1%	21%	2%	1%	1%		1%	1%	39%	20%	2%	10%	3%
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	1%	3%	13%	5%	1%			3%		37%	19%	14%	6%	3.4%
CEP	July 21-August 17, 2017	1.6%	2.2%	14.5%	0.5%	0.4%	0.1%	0.1%	1.1%	1.1%	31.3%	10.2%	1.4%	35.5%	3%
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	2%	4%	15%		2%					35%	17%	18%	7%	3.4%
Adimark	August 3–29, 2017	1%	5%	16%	1%	2%					34%	15%	4%	22%	3%
Adimark ^b	August 3–29, 2017	1%	7%	21%	1%	2%					40%	16%	2%	10%	3%
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	3%	3%	17%		3%					34%	17%	18%	5%	3.4%
CERC-Mori	September 1–12, 2017	2%	2%	20%		1%					31%	8%	35%		3%
CEP	September 22-October 16, 2017	3.4%	2.3%	13.8%							32.8%	7.0%	4.3%	36.4%	3%
Criteria Research	October 20–30, 2017	4%	5%	18%		7%					33%	15%	12%	6%	2.5%

^aLikely voter (52%).
^bLikely voter (49%).

First round

Question: "Given the following list of candidates, who would you vote for?"

Legend
—	Not on the list
	Wins election
	May win election
	Runoff
	May go to a runoff

Polling firm	Field dates	Artés	MEO	Goic	Guillier	JA Kast	Navarro	Piñera	Sánchez	Others	DK/NR	Error	Sample
CERC-Mori	December 7–15, 2016	—	5%	—	19%	—	—	23%	—	19%	34%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
CERC-Mori	March 28-April 10, 2017	—	3%	2%	14%	0%	0%	26%	4%	51%		2.8%	Total (n=1200)
Criteria Research	May 2–12, 2017	—	3%	3%	19%	3%	—	33%	21%	7%	12%	3.4%	Total (n=810)
Activa Research	June 2–9, 2017	—	1.6%	2.1%	13.9%	<1%	<1%	21.4%	7.1%	11.8%	42.1%	2.6%	Total (n=1395)
Criteria Research	June 1–11, 2017	—	5%	6%	19%	2%	—	36%	18%	1%	13%	3.4%	Total (n=814)
CERC-Mori	June 6–15, 2017	—	3%	5%	18%	—	1%	26%	10%	38%		2.8%	Total (n=1200)
Cadem	July 5–7, 2017	—	2%	3%	16%	4%	—	38%	26%	3%	8%	5.4%	Likely voter (45%, n=324)
Activa Research	July 7–12, 2017	—	0.6%	1.3%	14.0%	2.4%	<1%	28.3%	12.0%	3.9%	37.5%	2.6%	Total (n=1440)
Cadem	July 12–14, 2017	—	2%	2%	20%	4%	—	40%	23%	3%	6%	5.4%	Likely voter (45%, n=326)
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	—	5%	5%	14%	3%	—	38%	23%	5%	7%	3.4%	Total (n=825)
Cadem	July 19–21, 2017	—	2%	2%	21%	4%	—	40%	21%	2%	8%	5.6%	Likely voter (44%, n=310)
Cadem	July 26–28, 2017	—	4%	3%	22%	5%	—	42%	19%	1%	4%	5.3%	Likely voter (43%, n=345)
CEP ^a	July 21-August 17, 2017	—	2.4%	5.3%	17.8%	3.3%	—	39.7%	17.9%	2.9%	10.7%	4.1%	Will "surely" go to vote (40%, n=569)
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	—	2%	8%	18%	9%	—	38%	22%		3%	5.1%	Likely voter (45%, n=365)
Cadem	August 3–25, 2017	0%	2%	5%	19%	4%	0%	42%	19%		9%	2.8%	Likely voter (44%, n=1228)
Activa Research	August 11–18, 2017	<1%	1.7%	1%	17.9%	1.1%	<1%	44.4%	19.2%	1.5%	13.2%	3.8%	Likely voter (42.4%, n=673)
CERC-Mori	September 1–12, 2017	0%	4%	8%	30%	2%	1%	44%	11%			4.2%	Likely voter (45%, n=540)
Cadem	August 30-September 29, 2017	0%	3%	5%	20%	4%	0%	43%	15%		10%	2.3%	Likely voter (47%, n=1782)
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	0%	1%	8%	19%	6%	0%	36%	24%		6%	4.7%	Likely voter (49%, n=430)
Activa Research	September 21–28, 2017	<0.5%	6.1%	2.2%	11.2%	8.6%	<0.5%	45.2%	15.5%		10.7%	4.4%	Likely voter (32.9%, n=487)
CEP ^a	September 22-October 16, 2017	0.1%	4.6%	3.9%	19.7%	2.7%	0.5%	44.4%	8.5%		15.6%	3.9%^b	Likely voter (44%, n=627^b)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	0%	4%	4%	21%	5%	0%	43%	13%		10%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Criteria Research	October 20–30, 2017	1%	5%	6%	24%	6%	0%	39%	15%		4%	3.6%	Likely voter (46%, n=724)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	1%	6%	5%	20%	6%	1%	42%	13%		7%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	November 8–10, 2017	0.5%	7%	6%	20%	7%	0.5%	39%	13%		7%	N/A%	Likely voter (48%, n=N/A)
Activa Research	November 8–17, 2017	0.5%	5.5%	3.9%	21.1%	5.4%	0.1%	35.1%	14.0%		14.3%	3.1%	Likely voter (48.9%, n=989)
Cadem	November 14–16, 2017	0.5%	5%	6%	21%	6%	0.5%	40%	13%		8%	3.6%	Likely voter (46%, n=727)

^aBallot-box vote. ^b Estimated.

Second round

Question: "If the following two candidates proceed to a runoff election, who would you vote for?"

Legend
—	Not on the list
	Wins election
	May win election

Polling firm	Field dates	MEO	Goic	Guillier	JA Kast	Navarro	Piñera	Sánchez	DK/NR	Error	Sample
Criteria Research	November 28-December 7, 2016	—	—	42%	—	—	39%	—	18%	3.4%	Total (n=822)
CERC-Mori	December 7–15, 2016	—	—	35%	—	—	30%	—	35%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
Criteria Research	December 27, 2016 – January 4, 2017	—	—	42%	—	—	41%	—	17%	3.4%	Total (n=807)
Criteria Research	January 25-February 2, 2017	—	—	43%	—	—	43%	—	14%	4.4%	100% probability of voting (60%, n=487)
Criteria Research	January 25-February 2, 2017	—	13%	—	—	—	45%	—	14%	3.5%	Total (n=805)
Criteria Research	March 1–10, 2017	—	—	41%	—	—	36%	—	23%	3.3%	Total (n=869)
Criteria Research	March 1–10, 2017	—	18%	—	—	—	39%	—	42%	3.3%	Total (n=869)
CERC-Mori	March 28-April 10, 2017	—	—	33%	—	—	32%	—	35%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
CERC-Mori	March 28-April 10, 2017	—	18%	—	—	—	33%	—	49%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
CERC-Mori	March 28-April 10, 2017	—	—	—	—	10%	35%	—	55%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
Criteria Research	April 4–11, 2017	—	—	37%	—	—	41%	—	22%	3.4%	Total (n=852)
Criteria Research	April 4–11, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	43%	32%	26%	3.4%	Total (n=852)
Criteria Research	April 4–11, 2017	—	18%	—	—	—	45%	—	37%	3.4%	Total (n=852)
Criteria Research	May 2–12, 2017	—	—	40%	—	—	41%	—	19%	3.4%	Total (n=810)
Criteria Research	May 2–12, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	41%	42%	17%	3.4%	Total (n=810)
Criteria Research	May 2–12, 2017	—	22%	—	—	—	43%	—	35%	3.4%	Total (n=810)
CEP	April 26-May 22, 2017	—	14.2%	—	—	—	36.0%	—	49.8%	2.5%	Total (n=1481)
CEP	April 26-May 22, 2017	—	—	28.7%	—	—	32.9%	—	38.4%	2.5%	Total (n=1481)
Criteria Research	June 1–11, 2017	—	—	40%	—	—	43%	—	17%	3.4%	Total (n=814)
Criteria Research	June 1–11, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	45%	33%	22%	3.4%	Total (n=814)
Criteria Research	June 1–11, 2017	—	27%	—	—	—	42%	—	31%	3.4%	Total (n=814)
CERC-Mori	June 6–15, 2017	—	—	35%	—	—	32%	—	33%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
CERC-Mori	June 6–15, 2017	—	23%	—	—	—	33%	—	44%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
CERC-Mori	June 6–15, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	33%	26%	41%	2.8%	Total (n=1200)
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	—	—	37%	—	—	45%	—	18%	3.4%	Total (n=825)
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	45%	42%	13%	3.4%	Total (n=825)
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	—	24%	—	—	—	45%	—	31%	3.4%	Total (n=825)
Criteria Research	July 14–19, 2017	27%	—	—	—	—	47%	—	26%	3.4%	Total (n=825)
Cadem	July 5–28, 2017	—	—	39%	—	—	49%	—	12%	2.7%	Likely voter (46%, n=1327)
Cadem	July 5–28, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	48%	42%	10%	2.7%	Likely voter (46%, n=1327)
Cadem	July 5–28, 2017	—	27%	—	—	—	50%	—	23%	2.7%	Likely voter (46%, n=1327)
Activa Research	July 7–12, 2017	—	—	23.7%	—	—	32.8%	—	43.5%	2.6%	Total (n=1440)
Activa Research	July 7–12, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	32.7%	28.3%	39.0%	2.6%	Total (n=1440)
CEP ^a	July 21-August 17, 2017	—	23.7%	—	—	—	48.9%	—	27.5%	4.1%	Will "surely" go to vote (40%, n=569)
CEP ^a	July 21-August 17, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	45.7%	34.9%	19.4%	4.1%	Will "surely" go to vote (40%, n=569)
CEP ^a	July 21-August 17, 2017	—	—	35.7%	—	—	46.6%	—	17.7%	4.1%	Will "surely" go to vote (40%, n=569)
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	—	—	38%	—	—	46%	—	16%	5.1%	Likely voter (45%, n=368)
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	48%	41%	11%	5.1%	Likely voter (45%, n=368)
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	—	33%	—	—	—	48%	—	19%	5.1%	Likely voter (45%, n=368)
Criteria Research	August 11–17, 2017	25%	—	—	—	—	49%	—	26%	5.1%	Likely voter (45%, n=368)
Activa Research	August 11–18, 2017	—	—	33.9%	—	—	46.9%	—	19.2%	4%	Likely voter (42.4%, n=600)
Activa Research	August 11–18, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	46.8%	29.7%	23.5%	4%	Likely voter (42.4%, n=600)
Cadem	August 3–25, 2017	—	—	37%	—	—	49%	—	14%	2.8%	Likely voter (44%, n=1228)
Cadem	August 3–25, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	50%	39%	11%	2.8%	Likely voter (44%, n=1228)
Cadem	August 3–25, 2017	—	27%	—	—	—	51%	—	22%	2.8%	Likely voter (44%, n=1228)
Cadem	August 3–25, 2017	24%	—	—	—	—	53%	—	23%	2.8%	Likely voter (44%, n=1228)
Cadem	August 30-September 29, 2017	—	—	38%	—	—	50%	—	12%	2.3%	Likely voter (47%, n=1782)
Cadem	August 30-September 29, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	50%	36%	14%	2.3%	Likely voter (47%, n=1782)
Cadem	August 30-September 29, 2017	—	28%	—	—	—	51%	—	21%	2.3%	Likely voter (47%, n=1782)
Cadem	August 30-September 29, 2017	24%	—	—	—	—	52%	—	24%	2.3%	Likely voter (47%, n=1782)
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	—	—	44%	—	—	45%	—	11%	4.7%	Likely voter (45%, n=430)
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	46%	45%	9%	4.7%	Likely voter (45%, n=430)
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	—	30%	—	—	—	45%	—	25%	4.7%	Likely voter (45%, n=430)
Criteria Research	September 21–24, 2017	28%	—	—	—	—	49%	—	23%	4.7%	Likely voter (45%, n=430)
Activa Research	September 21–28, 2017	—	—	29%	—	—	48.2%	—	22.8%	4.4%	Likely voter (32.9%, n=487)
Activa Research	September 21–28, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	48.8%	31.4%	19.8%	4.4%	Likely voter (32.9%, n=487)
CEP ^a	September 22-October 16, 2017	—	19.7%	—	—	—	40.0%	—	40.3%	2.6%	Total (n=1424)
CEP ^a	September 22-October 16, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	39.7%	23.3%	37.0%	2.6%	Total (n=1424)
CEP ^a	September 22-October 16, 2017	—	—	27.2%	—	—	39.4%	—	33.4%	2.6%	Total (n=1424)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	—	—	38%	—	—	50%	—	12%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	51%	35%	14%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	—	29%	—	—	—	50%	—	21%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	25%	—	—	—	—	52%	—	23%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Cadem	October 4–26, 2017	—	—	—	15%	—	49%	—	36%	1.8%	Likely voter (49%, n=2964)
Criteria Research	October 20–30, 2017	—	—	46%	—	—	49%	—	5%	3.6%	Likely voter (46%, n=724)
Criteria Research	October 20–30, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	49%	41%	10%	3.6%	Likely voter (46%, n=724)
Activa Research	November 8–17, 2017	—	—	38.8%	—	—	44.1%	—	17.0%	3.1%	Likely voter (48.9%, n=989)
Activa Research	November 8–17, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	45.8%	36.3%	17.8%	3.1%	Likely voter (48.9%, n=989)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	—	—	38%	—	—	50%	—	12%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	—	—	—	—	—	51%	36%	13%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	—	31%	—	—	—	50%	—	19%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	29%	—	—	—	—	51%	—	20%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	October 31-November 2, 2017	—	—	—	18%	—	49%	—	33%	3.5%	Likely voter (48%, n=796)
Cadem	November 8–10, 2017	—	—	38%	—	—	48%	—	14%	N/A%	Likely voter (48%, n=N/A)
Cadem	November 14–16, 2017	—	—	39%	—	—	48%	—	13%	3.6%	Likely voter (46%, n=727)
Cadem	November 22–24, 2017	—	—	37.3%	—	—	39.8%	—	22.9%	2.6%	Total (n=1442)
Criteria Research	November 22–28, 2017	—	—	46%	—	—	51%	—	3%	3.7%	Likely voter (44%, n=702)
Cadem	November 29-December 1, 2017	—	—	38.6%	—	—	40.0%	—	21.4%	2.6%	Total (n=1439)
Cadem	December 13–15, 2017	—	—	33.4%	—	—	39.6%	—	27.0%	2.6%	Total (n=1455)

^aBallot-box vote.

Related Research Articles

Approval voting is an electoral system in which voters can select any number of candidates instead of selecting only one.

The single transferable vote (STV), sometimes known as proportional ranked choice voting (P-RCV), is a multi-winner electoral system in which each voter casts a single vote in the form of a ranked-choice ballot. Voters have the option to rank candidates, and their vote may be transferred according to alternate preferences if their preferred candidate is eliminated or elected with surplus votes, so that their vote is used to elect someone they prefer over others in the running. STV aims to approach proportional representation based on votes cast in the district where it is used, so that each vote is worth about the same as another.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voting</span> Method to make collective decisions

Voting is a method by which a group, such as a meeting or an electorate, convenes together for the purpose of making a collective decision or expressing an opinion usually following discussions, debates or election campaigns. Democracies elect holders of high office by voting. Residents of a jurisdiction represented by an elected official are called "constituents", and the constituents who choose to cast a ballot for their chosen candidate are called "voters." There are different systems for collecting votes, but while many of the systems used in decision-making can also be used as electoral systems, any which cater to proportional representation can only be used in elections.

The electoral system of Australia comprises the laws and processes used for the election of members of the Australian Parliament and is governed primarily by the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. The system presently has a number of distinctive features including compulsory enrolment; compulsory voting; majority-preferential instant-runoff voting in single-member seats to elect the lower house, the House of Representatives; and the use of the single transferable vote proportional representation system to elect the upper house, the Senate.

Electoral fraud, sometimes referred to as election manipulation, voter fraud, or vote rigging, involves illegal interference with the process of an election, either by increasing the vote share of a favored candidate, depressing the vote share of rival candidates, or both. It differs from but often goes hand-in-hand with voter suppression. What exactly constitutes electoral fraud varies from country to country, though the goal is often election subversion.

The secret ballot, also known as the Australian ballot, is a voting method in which a voter's identity in an election or a referendum is anonymous. This forestalls attempts to influence the voter by intimidation, blackmailing, and potential vote buying. This system is one means of achieving the goal of political privacy.

Reversal symmetry is a voting system criterion which requires that if candidate A is the unique winner, and each voter's individual preferences are inverted, then A must not be elected. Methods that satisfy reversal symmetry include Borda count, ranked pairs, Kemeny–Young method, and Schulze method. Methods that fail include Bucklin voting, instant-runoff voting and Condorcet methods that fail the Condorcet loser criterion such as Minimax.

In voting, a ballot is considered spoilt, spoiled, void, null, informal, invalid or stray if a law declares or an election authority determines that it is invalid and thus not included in the vote count. This may occur accidentally or deliberately. The total number of spoilt votes in a United States election has been called the residual vote. In Australia, such votes are generally referred to as informal votes, and in Canada they are referred to as rejected votes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ThreeBallot</span> End-to-end auditable anonymous voting system

ThreeBallot is a voting protocol invented by Ron Rivest in 2006. ThreeBallot is an end-to-end (E2E) auditable voting system that can in principle be implemented on paper. The goal in its design was to provide some of the benefits of a cryptographic voting system without using cryptographic keys.

A retention election or retention referendum is a referendum where voters are asked if an office holder, usually a judge, should be allowed to continue in that office. The judge is removed from office if a majority of votes are cast against retention. Retention elections are held periodically, usually at the same time as a general election.

There are a number of complications and issues surrounding the application and use of single transferable vote proportional representation that form the basis of discussions between its advocates and detractors.

In Australia, how-to-vote cards (HTV) are small leaflets that are handed out by party supporters during elections. Voting in the Australian lower house uses a preferential voting system. Voters must rank every candidate on the ballot in order for their vote to count. There are often numerous candidates on the ballot, some with little public profile, so voters may find it difficult to decide on all of them. Parties produce how-to-vote cards ostensibly to help voters. They contain details about the candidate or party as well as instruction how to cast a ranked vote in the order that the party would prefer the voter follow. The flow of preferences can assist the party dispersing the cards directly and indirectly help allied parties.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV), also known as alternative vote (AV) or plurality loser, is a ranked-choice voting system that modifies plurality by repeatedly eliminating the last-place finisher until only one candidate is left. In the United States, IRV is often mistaken conflated with ranked-choice voting (RCV); however, this conflation is not completely standard, and social choice theorists tend to prefer more explicit terms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranked voting</span> Family of electoral systems

The term ranked voting, also known as preferential voting or ranked-choice voting, pertains to any voting system where voters indicate a rank to order candidates or options—in a sequence from first, second, third, and onwards—on their ballots. Ranked voting systems vary based on the ballot marking process, how preferences are tabulated and counted, the number of seats available for election, and whether voters are allowed to rank candidates equally.

An Icelandic Constitutional Council (Stjórnlagaráð) for the purpose of reviewing the Constitution of the Republic was appointed by a resolution of Althingi, the Icelandic parliament, on 24 March 2011. Elections were held to create a Constitutional Assembly (Stjórnlagaþing) body, but given some electoral flaws, had been ruled null and void by the Supreme Court of Iceland on 25 January 2011, leading the parliament to place most of the winning candidates into a Constitutional Council with similar mission. The question of whether the text of the proposed constitution should form a base for a future constitution was put to a non-binding referendum, where it won the approval of 67% of voters. However, the government's term finished before the reform bill could be passed, and following governments have not acted upon it.

Voter segments in political polling in the United States consist of all adults, registered voters, and likely voters.

The 2020 United States presidential election in Georgia was held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, as part of the 2020 United States presidential election in which all 50 states plus the District of Columbia participated. Georgia voters chose electors to represent them in the Electoral College via a popular vote, pitting the Republican Party's nominee, incumbent President Donald Trump of Florida, and running mate Vice President Mike Pence of Indiana against Democratic Party nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden of Delaware, and his running mate Senator Kamala Harris of California. Georgia has 16 electoral votes in the Electoral College.

Postal voting in the United States, also referred to as mail-in voting or vote by mail, is a form of absentee ballot in the United States, in which a ballot is mailed to the home of a registered voter, who fills it out and returns it by postal mail or drops it off in-person at a secure drop box or voting center. Postal voting reduces staff requirements at polling centers during an election. All-mail elections can save money, while a mix of voting options can cost more. In some states, ballots may be sent by the Postal Service without prepayment of postage.

Massachusetts Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative, also known as Question 2, was an initiative at the 2020 Massachusetts general election that would have changed primaries and elections in Massachusetts from plurality voting to ranked-choice voting (RCV) for all Massachusetts statewide offices, state legislative offices, federal congressional offices, and certain other offices beginning in 2022. RCV would not be extended to elections for president, county commissioner, or regional district school committee member. The initiative failed, with 54.8% of voters voting 'No' and 45.2% 'Yes'.

On November 2, 2010, Illinois voters approved the Illinois Governor Recall Amendment, a legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Constitution of Illinois. The amendment changed the state constitution to allow recall elections of Illinois governors.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.