Singapore vs United States: Men's universal right to vote
Singapore
1
in 2025
United States
1
in 2025
Singapore rank
1st
United States rank
1st
Men's universal right to vote over time
- Singapore
- United States
How they compare
Singapore currently reports 1 against 1 in United States, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 159 shared years of data; in 1867 it was United States ahead.
Singapore ranks 1st and United States ranks 1st of 198 countries.
Singapore has averaged higher in every one of the 17 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Singapore | United States | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1860s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1870s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1880s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1890s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1900s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1910s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1920s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1930s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | Singapore |
| 1960s | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | Singapore |
| 1970s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1980s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher men's universal right to vote, Singapore or United States?
- Singapore, at 1 against 1 in United States as of 2025.
- What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Singapore and United States?
- 0, with Singapore ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Singapore and United States?
- 159 years are reported by both, from 1867 to 2025.
- How do Singapore and United States rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
- Singapore ranks 1st and United States ranks 1st of 198 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Men's universal right to vote. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Indicates whether all men are allowed to vote in national elections. It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.