By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Hungarians recently achieved a historic voter turnout of 77.8 percent in an effort to defeat Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. This level of participation far surpasses recent U.S. presidential election turnouts, which have typically remained below two-thirds of eligible voters. The article posits that the United States may be moving towards “competitive authoritarianism,” characterized by elections that are real but unfair, due to systematic efforts to disenfranchise voters through measures like racist redistricting and burdensome identification requirements. These actions, coupled with limitations on vote-by-mail, have led to declining confidence in the fairness of U.S. elections, suggesting a critical juncture for American democracy.
Read the original article here
Vote while you still can, because massive turnout is truly our most potent weapon against the systematic efforts to chip away at voter access in the United States. It’s a stark reality we face: the right to vote, something many of us have perhaps taken for granted, is under considerable strain. We see this reflected in discussions about how even significant popular vote victories can be undermined by mechanisms like gerrymandering, making it incredibly difficult to achieve proportional representation. The experience of countries like Hungary, where a near-record 77.8 percent of voters turned out to oust an authoritarian leader, offers a powerful example. That level of participation is a benchmark the U.S. hasn’t seen in over a century, highlighting just how much more we can and must mobilize.
The core of the problem is that those who seek to suppress votes understand the power of sheer numbers. Their efforts, from gerrymandering to making voting more difficult, are often a sign that they cannot win on the merits of their ideas or through genuinely fair elections. If they could simply win outright, why expend so much energy on tactics that aim to prevent people from casting their ballots in the first place? They cannot simply “make up” or “hack” the results, as evidenced by the fact that they sometimes spend immense resources on elections and still lose. This suggests that their efforts are focused on suppressing opposition turnout, which then makes overwhelming victory through collective action all the more critical.
When we talk about defeating these tactics, high voter turnout becomes the most effective counter-strategy. Gerrymandering, while a significant hurdle, can backfire spectacularly when the opposition turns out in overwhelming numbers. The more aggressively districts are drawn to favor one party, the more a high turnout from the opposing party can swing elections dramatically. This isn’t about hoping for small gains; it’s about creating a mathematical impossibility for the opposition to win. Considering the current political landscape, where independents make up a substantial portion of the electorate, a unified and massive turnout from Democrats and independents could ensure victory regardless of other manipulative tactics.
The sheer scale of voter suppression efforts underscores their desperation. If they could simply rig elections or secure victory through popular will, they wouldn’t need to invest so heavily in making it harder for certain demographics to vote. Their focus on these tactics indicates a reliance on weakening the opposition’s voice. This is why our focus must be on empowering every eligible voter to cast their ballot, and then some. It means not only voting ourselves but also actively participating in efforts to get out the vote, ensuring that every motivated individual has the support they need to make their voice heard.
The statistics surrounding U.S. voter turnout are quite telling. Presidential elections rarely see more than two-thirds of eligible Americans voting, and in many historical periods, it’s been closer to half. This gap represents millions of potential votes left on the table, votes that could fundamentally alter election outcomes and push back against authoritarian tendencies. Learning from examples like Hungary, where near-universal participation was key, we can see that when people are sufficiently motivated and engaged, the votes are indeed there to be cast, and they can be a powerful force for change.
The effectiveness of high turnout is particularly crucial when we consider how elections are conducted. While gerrymandering significantly impacts representation in the House of Representatives, it doesn’t apply to statewide races like Senate elections or the presidency. This means that in these contests, the collective will of the voters, expressed through a massive turnout, can be a more direct determinant of the outcome, overriding some of the more insidious attempts at manipulation. It’s about leveraging the inherent democratic power that resides with the people when they choose to exercise it in full force.
Furthermore, it’s vital to remember that high turnout is beneficial for democracy regardless of which side one supports. It signifies a healthy and engaged citizenry, one that is invested in the democratic process. However, in the current climate, where there are clear and systematic efforts to undermine democratic norms, maximizing turnout becomes an act of preservation. It’s not just about electing a particular candidate or party; it’s about safeguarding the very foundations of our electoral system against those who would seek to weaken it through disenfranchisement.
The frustration expressed by many is understandable, especially when it feels like efforts to promote democracy are met with resistance or perceived inaction. However, the argument that voting alone isn’t enough, or that the system is rigged beyond repair, risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. While it’s true that we need more than just voting—we need community organizing, advocacy, and sustained engagement—voting remains the most fundamental and accessible way for individuals to participate in shaping their government. To not vote is to cede power to those who are actively trying to suppress it.
The idea that the “happy thoughts” of civic engagement aren’t paying off is a sentiment that can easily lead to despair. Yet, looking at special election victories and court challenges that have halted or weakened certain policies, it’s clear that collective action, including voting, *does* have an impact. The key is to maintain that momentum and recognize that the fight for democratic integrity is ongoing. It requires consistent effort, and each election cycle presents an opportunity to reinforce those gains and push back against further erosion.
Ultimately, the call to “Vote While You Still Can” is a pragmatic and powerful strategy. It acknowledges the challenges and threats to our voting rights but places the solution squarely in our hands. By mobilizing unprecedented numbers of voters, we can create an electoral landslide that makes it mathematically impossible for those seeking to disenfranchise us to succeed. It’s a testament to the enduring power of the people when they unite and make their voices heard at the ballot box, a powerful reminder that our collective power is our greatest asset in the defense of democracy.