BOZEMAN, Mont. — Stuck on a snowy sidewalk for hours after polls closed, voters in a Montana college town created an encouraging vibe as they moved slowly through a line leading to the ballot boxes inside the county courthouse.

They huddled under blankets and noshed on chips, nuts and pizza handed out by volunteers. They swayed to an impromptu street DJ, waved glow sticks and remembered a couple of truths: This is a college town and hanging out late at night for a good cause is fun — even in the teeth-chattering cold.

R-r-r-Right?

Hardy residents of Bozeman, Montana, queued along Main Street by the hundreds on election night, with Democrats, Republicans and independents sharing a not-so-brief moment of camaraderie and warmth to close out an otherwise caustic election season.

Among them, clad in a puffy down jacket and a thin pair of gardening gloves, was Davor Danevski, a 38-year-old tech worker. By early Wednesday morning, he’d waited almost five hours.

“The last two elections I missed because I was living abroad in Europe. I didn’t want to miss a third election,” said Danevski. “Too many people don’t take it as seriously as they should.”

Polls closed at 8 p.m. The last ballot was cast at 4 a.m. by an undoubtedly committed voter.

The long wait traces to a clash of Montana’s recent population growth and people who waited until the last minute to register to vote, change their address on file or get a replacement ballot. Many voters in the hometown of Montana State University were students.

The growth of Gallatin County — up almost 40% since 2010 — meant the 10 election workers crammed into an office were woefully insufficient to process all the last-minute voter registrations and changes.

“The building’s just not set up … It’s not designed to hold all the people that Gallatin County has now for every election. So we need to do something about that,” County Clerk Eric Semerad said of the structure built in 1935.

As darkness descended, flurries swirled and temperatures plunged into the 20s (minus 15 degrees Celsius), Kael Richards, a 22-year-old project engineer for a concrete company, took his place with a friend at the back of the line.

He appreciated the food and hand warmers given out before he finally cast his vote at 1 a.m. By then, he estimated, he had been lined up between seven and eight hours.

“The people down there were super nice,” Richards said Wednesday. “We thought about throwing in the towel but we were pretty much at the point that we’ve already been here, so why not?”

The county clerk asked county emergency officials to help manage the crowd since it was snowing. They shut down a road by the courthouse and set up tents with heaters inside. “It was brilliant,” Semerad said.

The line’s precise length was hard to measure as it snaked along the sidewalk, into the road and through the tent. It continued up the courthouse steps, jammed through a doorway, wrapped around an open lobby, up some more stairs, between rows of glass cases filled with historic artifacts and finally into the office of late-toiling election workers.

In past elections, lines have gone past midnight, but never as late as Tuesday’s, Semerad said. Many waiting could have stepped out of line and cast provisional ballots but chose to stick it out.

As midnight came and went Danevski stood patiently waiting his turn to start up the courthouse steps. For him, the long hours were worth it.

“If you can, you should always try to vote,” he said.

___

Gruver reported from Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Voters in Montana who could change the state’s constitution — and the way the Treasure State votes — decided not to as results inched closer to being tallied across the snow-dusted state.

The two changes were proposed in tandem and would have altered how voters choose candidates. While one of the initiatives, Constitutional Initiative 126 appeared close at times on Election Day to passing, but by Wednesday morning both it and its companion initiative, Constitutional Initiative 127 appeared destined for defeat.

The Associated Press called both races late Wednesday morning with about 92% of votes counted. CI-126 failed to pass by a margin of about 20,000 votes, 48% to 52%. while votes against CI-127 garnered 61% of the vote, to 38% in favor of the measure.

CI-126 would change Montana’s primaries and have a ripple effect on the general election.

It would allow for the top four candidates in most races to advance to the general election, regardless of party. Though the system has been referred to as an “open primary,” it’s more accurately called a “jungle primary.” Currently in Montana, the primaries are open to all voters, but Montana residents must choose which party ballot to vote.

Supporters of CI-126 said that it would allow Montanans to select the best candidate, regardless of parties. Opponents said it just adds confusion and uncertainty to the process.

CI-126 had been rejected by voters with 278,195 voting against it, while 258,470 supported it.

“Today is a disappointing day as we see politicians and special interests once again succeed at stopping Montanans from gaining more power in our elections,” said Frank Garner, a board member for the group behind the measure, Montanans for Election reform. “We fought hard against the entrenched politicians and special interests who didn’t want to give voters more voice and better choices on the ballot because the current system benefits them, not voters. We still believe open primaries are a powerful tool to hold politicians accountable and put the power over our elections back in the hands of voters, but they aren’t the only path forward. We will continue to stand up for freedom and choice in our elections.”

CI-127, which is supported by the same backers as CI-126, had 61% of voters opposing it and just 39% in favor at press time. It would require that the top candidate in any race be elected with a majority (50% or more) rather than a plurality. If no candidate receives at least 50% of the vote, then the Legislature would determine how the winner is selected.

Currently, the Montana Legislature has outlawed ranked choice voting, so it would either have to change or repeal the law, or consider another means of selecting a candidate, including a “snap run off,” which would require another statewide election.

CI-127 never appeared to be ahead in the polls.

Even though the initiatives were supported by the same group, both do not need to pass to function in law.

For example, if CI-126 passes, it would simply mean that the top four vote-getters, regardless of political party, would advance to the general election. Likewise, if only CI-127 passes, then it would require that the winner of an election receive at least 50%, regardless of how many people are on the ballot.

Constitutional Initiative 126 and 127 were two of three initiatives that could change the Montana Constitution. The other, Constitutional Initiative 128, would enshrine the right to an abortion in the constitution even though the procedure has been legal for years, based on Supreme Court precedent.

Montana voters approved a ballot measure enshrining abortion in the state constitution, NBC News projects, delivering a victory to advocates for reproductive rights in a Western red state.

The amendment will not change current law on abortion in Montana: Abortion is legal in the state until fetal viability, around the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy, backed up by a 1999 ruling by the state Supreme Court.

But advocates for the ballot measure wanted to guard against potential changes by the Legislature or state Supreme Court justices in the heavily Republican state.

The amendment establishes a right for people to “make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy,” including the right to abortion; prohibits the government from “denying or burdening” the right to abortion before fetal viability; and bars the government from “denying or burdening access” to abortion when a health care professional determines it is “medically indicated to protect the pregnant patient’s life or heath,” according to the ballot language.

The measure also prevents the government from “penalizing patients, healthcare providers, or anyone who assists in exercising their right to make and carry out voluntary decisions about their pregnancy.”

The ballot measure required a simple majority to pass. It withstood a series of legal challenges from Republicans in the solidly conservative state.

Nine other states considered constitutional amendments concerning abortion rights in this election: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New York and South Dakota.