Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Minnesota voter turnout down to 50 percent, a drop from recent mid-terms

Minnesota’s voter turnout for Tuesday’s election was just over 50 percent of eligible voters, a drop from past mid-term elections.

Secretary of State Mark Ritchie said preliminary results show that 1,985,747 residents cast votes, which is just about half of those eligible; the number will rise slightly when final tallies are made.

In the 2006 mid-term election, turnout was 60.47 percent, and in 2010 it was 55.81, he said.

Mid-terms always have much lower turnout than elections in presidential years; in 2012 Minnesota’s turnout was 76 percent.

Absentee voting was up considerably this year from past mid-terms, with no excuses required for the first time.

Reports so far show that Minnesotans requested 236,089 absentee ballots prior to Tuesday’s election, and that 197,691 were returned and accepted. That’s about 10 percent of the votes cast in the election.

In the previous mid-term, 201o, 127,248 absentee ballots were accepted, about 6 percent of the total votes cast.

In the 2012 presidential election, 267,464 absentee ballots were counted, about 9 percent of the votes cast.

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (2)

  1. Submitted by Rebecca Wentz on 11/06/2014 - 10:40 am.

    low voter turnout

    most people have decided that for whatever reason they don’t have a voice so many times our elected officials put their focus on one group-the middle class- and forget about the rest of us. they forget about our senior citizens who have reached retirement age yet still can’t afford to retire. they forget about our middle age citizens who have no children in their homes and are having a hard time getting back into the workforce for whatever reason. they forget about our rural minnesotans who have very limited access to jobs because they live several miles from the nearest major city. in reality, our elected officials have become detached from the majority of the citizens of this state. the way they look at unemployment percentages is wrong and as a result those without children in their home and our elders suffer the consequences. when our senior citizens and middle aged citizens have to pay in on their income taxes every year while most families with children technically don’t pay their fair share as they get several tax breaks that give them thousands back every year the system needs to change! quite honestly with a struggling economy and our federal deficit dangerously high how can any government-state or federal-consistently take more from people who truly need the help and overly give to those who don’t properly budget their money, will go spend thousands on a credit card, and then turn around and complain they are broke and get food stamps and free day care! because there is consistently no change and no one wants to actually listen and create change for these groups of people why should they vote? at the end of the day nothing changes and the same mistakes keep getting made. until someone truly wants to create change and listen to what needs to happen voter turn out will dwindle more and more. there are several people who have good ideas for creating jobs, financial stability, and equality overall, but unfortunately no one wants to hear! I speak from experience on this subject. I have a good plan to restructure the welfare programs to make them work as they should and it would create jobs in the process(entry level). I also have ideas about how to even the playing field with tax reform as well. the problem is I can not get the right people to listen to me

  2. Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 11/06/2014 - 05:27 pm.

    Someone out there in the world of journalism could do us a favor by dissecting these macro figures into smaller units, so we can see where the big percentages of registered or eligible voters who voted were, and where they stayed home.

    Who are the Minnesotans who figured Why Bother?

    50% voting is shameful, for Minnesota and its proud past. We have to understand this.

Leave a Reply