China vs Trinidad and Tobago: Men's universal right to vote
China
1
in 2025
Trinidad and Tobago
1
in 2025
China rank
1st
Trinidad and Tobago rank
1st
Men's universal right to vote over time
- China
- Trinidad and Tobago
How they compare
China currently reports 1 against 1 in Trinidad and Tobago, a difference of 0.
Across all 137 years both countries report, Trinidad and Tobago has been ahead every year.
China ranks 1st and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Trinidad and Tobago has averaged higher in every one of the 15 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | China | Trinidad and Tobago | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.1 | Trinidad and Tobago |
| 1950s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1960s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 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, China or Trinidad and Tobago?
- China, at 1 against 1 in Trinidad and Tobago as of 2025.
- What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between China and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 0, with China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 137 years are reported by both, from 1889 to 2025.
- How do China and Trinidad and Tobago rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
- China ranks 1st and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 1st of 197 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.