Post

🚨 This week, we got a call from a VotingWorks jurisdiction – a local resident watchdog was alarmed that the numbers from our voting system tally sheet "didn't add up". So we got on a video call.

VotingWorks

@voting.works

10 May

😱 "Look at these numbers! 2,556 for the first, 2,715 for the second, and 77 write-ins, that is *a lot* more than 4,216 ballots! And what's going on with 3,084 undervotes! That's more than the winner got!" 🤔 It's not immediately obvious how this all adds up... unless you know elections well.

VotingWorks

@voting.works

10 May

This is a "vote for 2" contest. Every voter gets to pick up to two choices. But of course they don't have to. They can choose 0, 1, or 2. For accounting, you have to consider that, with 4,216 ballots cast, there are 8,432 opportunities to fill bubbles – twice the number of ballots cast.

VotingWorks

@voting.works

10 May

That means a single ballot can generate up to two undervotes for that contest, which is admittedly a little confusing. And it's *very* common for a voter to fill in only one bubble, which means a single ballot will generate a vote for a candidate *and* an undervote. So let's add things up:

VotingWorks

@voting.works

2,556 for A + 2,715 for B + 77 write-ins + 3,084 undervotes = 8,432 bubble opportunities ✅ That's the total number of bubbles that could be filled by 4,216 ballots for that contest. It adds up, as long as you understand the weird-but-logical details of ballot accounting for multi-seat contests.

10/5/26, 4:54 pm0 reposts1 like

VotingWorks

@voting.works

10 May

🇺🇸 We should all be so lucky to have a local watchdog that's ensuring the numbers add up. Then it's up to us, the technology providers, to support local election administrators in understanding and explaining to their voters how these things work.