PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau practices "data suppression", filtering some block groups from demographic publication because they do not meet a population threshold. This practice...

According to exit polling in ten key states of the 2024 presidential election in the United States, Donald Trump received the most support from white voters between the ages of ** and **. In comparison, ** percent of Black voters between the ages of ** and ** reported voting for Kamala Harris.

According to exit polling in ten key states of the 2024 presidential election in the United States, Donald Trump received the most support from men between the ages of ** and **. In comparison, ** percent of women between the ages of ** and ** reported voting for Kamala Harris.

According to exit polling in ten key states of the 2024 presidential election in the United States, ** percent of surveyed white voters reported voting for Donald Trump. In contrast, ** percent of Black voters reported voting for Kamala Harris.

This study contains selected electoral and demographic national data for nine nations in the 1950s and 1960s. The data were prepared for the Data Confrontation Seminar on the Use of Ecological Data in Comparative Cross-National Research held under the auspices of the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research on April 1-18, 1969. One of the primary concerns of this international seminar was the need for cooperation in the development of data resources in order to facilitate exchange of data among individual scholars and research groups. Election returns for two or more national and/or local elections are provided for each of the nine nations, as well as ecological materials for at least two time points in the general period of the 1950s and 1960s. While each dataset was received at a single level of aggregation, the data have been further aggregated to at least a second level of aggregation. In most cases, the data can be supplied at the commune or municipality level and at the province or district level as well. Part 1 (Germany, Regierungsbezirke), Part 2 (Germany, Kreise), Part 3 (Germany, Lander), and Part 4 (Germany, Wahlkreise) contain data for all kreise, laender (states), administrative districts, and electoral districts for national elections in the period 1957-1969, and for state elections in the period 1946-1969, and ecological data from 1951 and 1961. Part 5 (France, Canton), and Part 6 (France, Departemente) contain data for the cantons and departements of two regions of France (West and Central) for the national elections of 1956, 1962, and 1967, and ecological data for the years 1954 and 1962. Data are provided for election returns for selected parties: Communist, Socialist, Radical, Federation de Gauche, and the Fifth Republic. Included are raw votes and percentage of total votes for each party. Ecological data provide information on total population, proportion of total population in rural areas, agriculture, industry, labor force, and middle class in 1954, as well as urbanization, crime rates, vital statistics, migration, housing, and the index of "comforts." Part 7 (Japan, Kanagawa Prefecture), Part 8 (Japan, House of Representatives Time Series), Part 9 (Japan, House of (Councilors (Time Series)), and Part 10 (Japan, Prefecture) contain data for the 46 prefectures for 15 national elections between 1949 and 1968, including data for all communities in the prefecture of Kanagawa for 13 national elections, returns for 8 House of Representatives' elections, 7 House of Councilors' elections, descriptive data from 4 national censuses, and ecological data for 1950, 1955, 1960, and 1965. Data are provided for total number of electorate, voters, valid votes, and votes cast by such groups as the Jiyu, Minshu, Kokkyo, Minji, Shakai, Kyosan, and Mushozoku for the Communist, Socialist, Conservative, Komei, and Independent parties for all the 46 prefectures. Population characteristics include age, sex, employment, marriage and divorce rates, total number of live births, deaths, households, suicides, Shintoists, Buddhists, and Christians, and labor union members, news media subscriptions, savings rate, and population density. Part 11 (India, Administrative Districts) and Part 12 (India, State) contain data for all administrative districts and all states and union territories for the national and state elections in 1952, 1957, 1962, 1965, and 1967, the 1958 legislative election, and ecological data from the national censuses of 1951 and 1961. Data are provided for total number of votes cast for the Congress, Communist, Jan Sangh, Kisan Mazdoor Praja, Socialist, Republican, Regional, and other parties, contesting candidates, electorate, valid votes, and the percentage of valid votes cast. Also included are votes cast for the Rightist, Christian Democratic, Center, Socialist, and Communist parties in the 1958 legislative election. Ecological data include total population, urban population, sex distribution, occupation, economically active population, education, literate population, and number of Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jainis, Moslems, Sikhs, and other religious groups. Part 13 (Norway, Province), and Part 14 (Norway, Commune) consist of the returns for four national elections in 1949, 1953, 1957, and 1961, and descriptive data from two national censuses. Data are provided for the total number

Immigration and demographic change have become highly salient in American politics, partly because of the 2016 campaign of Donald Trump. Previous research indicates that local influxes of immigrants or unfamiliar ethnic groups can generate threatened responses, but has either focused on non-electoral outcomes or has analyzed elections in large geographic units such as counties. Here, we examine whether demographic changes at low levels of aggregation were associated with vote shifts toward an anti-immigration presidential candidate between 2012 and 2016. To do so, we compile a novel, precinct-level data set of election results and demographic measures for almost 32,000 precincts in the states of Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington. We employ regression analyses varying model specifications and measures of demographic change. Our estimates uncover little evidence that influxes of Hispanics or non-citizen immigrants benefited Trump relative to past Republicans, instead consistently showing that such changes were associated with shifts to Trump's opponent.

According to results on November 6, 2024, former President Donald Trump had received *** Electoral College votes in the race to become the next President of the United States, securing him the presidency. With all states counted, Trump received a total of *** electoral votes. Candidates need *** votes to become the next President of the United States.

According to exit polling in the 2020 Presidential Election in the United States, ** percent of surveyed voters making less than 50,000 U.S. dollars reported voting for former Vice President Joe Biden. In the race to become the next president of the United States, ** percent of voters with an income of 100,000 U.S. dollars or more reported voting for incumbent President Donald Trump.

This data collection contains electoral and demographic data for Massachusetts counties and cities during 1848-1876. The data for this collection were compiled to study electoral changes in Massachusetts politics during the Civil War period and to link the changes to socioeconomic determinants of support for the Republican and Democratic parties. Specific variables include number of voters for specific years and demographic information such as number of males and females and number of males employed in certain trades. Electoral data consists of election results.

AP VoteCast is a survey of the American electorate conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for Fox News, NPR, PBS NewsHour, Univision News, USA Today Network, The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press.

AP VoteCast combines interviews with a random sample of registered voters drawn from state voter files with self-identified registered voters selected using nonprobability approaches. In general elections, it also includes interviews with self-identified registered voters conducted using NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak® panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population.

Interviews are conducted in English and Spanish. Respondents may receive a small monetary incentive for completing the survey. Participants selected as part of the random sample can be contacted by phone and mail and can take the survey by phone or online. Participants selected as part of the nonprobability sample complete the survey online.

In the 2020 general election, the survey of 133,103 interviews with registered voters was conducted between Oct. 26 and Nov. 3, concluding as polls closed on Election Day. AP VoteCast delivered data about the presidential election in all 50 states as well as all Senate and governors’ races in 2020.

Using this Data - IMPORTANT

This is survey data and must be properly weighted during analysis: DO NOT REPORT THIS DATA AS RAW OR AGGREGATE NUMBERS!!

Instead, use statistical software such as R or SPSS to weight the data.

National Survey

The national AP VoteCast survey of voters and nonvoters in 2020 is based on the results of the 50 state-based surveys and a nationally representative survey of 4,141 registered voters conducted between Nov. 1 and Nov. 3 on the probability-based AmeriSpeak panel. It included 41,776 probability interviews completed online and via telephone, and 87,186 nonprobability interviews completed online. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 0.4 percentage points for voters and 0.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

State Surveys

In 20 states in 2020, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 1,000 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 3,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.3 percentage points for voters and 5.5 percentage points for nonvoters.

In an additional 20 states, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 500 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 2,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for voters and 6.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

In the remaining 10 states, AP VoteCast is based on about 1,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 4.5 percentage points for voters and 11.0 percentage points for nonvoters.

Although there is no statistically agreed upon approach for calculating margins of error for nonprobability samples, these margins of error were estimated using a measure of uncertainty that incorporates the variability associated with the poll estimates, as well as the variability associated with the survey weights as a result of calibration. After calibration, the nonprobability sample yields approximately unbiased estimates.

As with all surveys, AP VoteCast is subject to multiple sources of error, including from sampling, question wording and order, and nonresponse.

Sampling Details

Probability-based Registered Voter Sample

In each of the 40 states in which AP VoteCast included a probability-based sample, NORC obtained a sample of registered voters from Catalist LLC’s registered voter database. This database includes demographic information, as well as addresses and phone numbers for registered voters, allowing potential respondents to be contacted via mail and telephone. The sample is stratified by state, partisanship, and a modeled likelihood to respond to the postcard based on factors such as age, race, gender, voting history, and census block group education. In addition, NORC attempted to match sampled records to a registered voter database maintained by L2, which provided additional phone numbers and demographic information.

Prior to dialing, all probability sample records were mailed a postcard inviting them to complete the survey either online using a unique PIN or via telephone by calling a toll-free number. Postcards were addressed by name to the sampled registered voter if that individual was under age 35; postcards were addressed to “registered voter” in all other cases. Telephone interviews were conducted with the adult that answered the phone following confirmation of registered voter status in the state.

Nonprobability Sample

Nonprobability participants include panelists from Dynata or Lucid, including members of its third-party panels. In addition, some registered voters were selected from the voter file, matched to email addresses by V12, and recruited via an email invitation to the survey. Digital fingerprint software and panel-level ID validation is used to prevent respondents from completing the AP VoteCast survey multiple times.

AmeriSpeak Sample

During the initial recruitment phase of the AmeriSpeak panel, randomly selected U.S. households were sampled with a known, non-zero probability of selection from the NORC National Sample Frame and then contacted by mail, email, telephone and field interviewers (face-to-face). The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97% of the U.S. household population. Those excluded from the sample include people with P.O. Box-only addresses, some addresses not listed in the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence File and some newly constructed dwellings. Registered voter status was confirmed in field for all sampled panelists.

Weighting Details

AP VoteCast employs a four-step weighting approach that combines the probability sample with the nonprobability sample and refines estimates at a subregional level within each state. In a general election, the 50 state surveys and the AmeriSpeak survey are weighted separately and then combined into a survey representative of voters in all 50 states.

State Surveys

First, weights are constructed separately for the probability sample (when available) and the nonprobability sample for each state survey. These weights are adjusted to population totals to correct for demographic imbalances in age, gender, education and race/ethnicity of the responding sample compared to the population of registered voters in each state. In 2020, the adjustment targets are derived from a combination of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, Catalist’s voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. Prior to adjusting to population totals, the probability-based registered voter list sample weights are adjusted for differential non-response related to factors such as availability of phone numbers, age, race and partisanship.

Second, all respondents receive a calibration weight. The calibration weight is designed to ensure the nonprobability sample is similar to the probability sample in regard to variables that are predictive of vote choice, such as partisanship or direction of the country, which cannot be fully captured through the prior demographic adjustments. The calibration benchmarks are based on regional level estimates from regression models that incorporate all probability and nonprobability cases nationwide.

Third, all respondents in each state are weighted to improve estimates for substate geographic regions. This weight combines the weighted probability (if available) and nonprobability samples, and then uses a small area model to improve the estimate within subregions of a state.

Fourth, the survey results are weighted to the actual vote count following the completion of the election. This weighting is done in 10–30 subregions within each state.

National Survey

In a general election, the national survey is weighted to combine the 50 state surveys with the nationwide AmeriSpeak survey. Each of the state surveys is weighted as described. The AmeriSpeak survey receives a nonresponse-adjusted weight that is then adjusted to national totals for registered voters that in 2020 were derived from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, the Catalist voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. The state surveys are further adjusted to represent their appropriate proportion of the registered voter population for the country and combined with the AmeriSpeak survey. After all votes are counted, the national data file is adjusted to match the national popular vote for president.

The 1960 US presidential election was the first to take place in all fifty states (although not Washington DC), and the first time where the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution prevented the incumbent president from running for a third term in office. The race was contested between John F. Kennedy of the Democratic Party, and incumbent Vice President Richard Nixon of the Republican Party. Kennedy defeated future-President Lyndon B. Johnson in the Democratic National Convention and asked Johnson to serve as his running mate, while Nixon won the Republican nomination comfortably, despite an early challenge from Nelson Rockefeller. This campaign is also notable for being the first to use televised debates between the candidates, including one that used split-screen technology, allowing the candidates to speak live from opposite sides of the country.

Campaign

Early in the campaign, both candidates were vibrant and charismatic, and garnered a loyal follower base. Kennedy spent most of his campaign criticizing the previous administration for falling behind the Soviet Union in terms of the military, economy and the space race, while Nixon highlighted the achievements made by Eisenhower's administration, and promised to build on them. Most historians agree that Kennedy's campaign was more structured and used better tactics than Nixon's, by canvassing heavily in swing states and districts instead of giving equal attention to all parts of the country (as Nixon did), with Kennedy focusing on metropolitan areas while Johnson canvassed in the south. Nixon's campaign was also more prone to mistakes, such as not preparing and refusing make-up for televised debates (making him look ill), while his running mate promised to elect African-Americans to the cabinet, however this just alienated black voters who were ambivalent in their reaction. Kennedy's connection with Martin Luther King Jr. also helped him to take a much larger share of the black vote than his opponent.

Results and Controversy

The popular vote was split by fewer than 120,000 out of seventy million votes. Kennedy took 49.7 percent of the popular vote, while Nixon took 49.5 percent. Nixon, however took more states than Kennedy, carrying 26 to Kennedy's 22, but Kennedy's tactical campaigning paid off, as his 22 states returned 303 electoral votes to Nixon's 219. Unpledged Democratic electors in the south gave 15 electoral votes to Harry F. Byrd, as they opposed Kennedy's stance on civil rights. Due to the close nature of the results, many Republicans called for recounts and accused the Kennedy campaign of cheating or committing voter fraud. For example, they highlighted that more votes were cast in certain districts of Texas (Johnson's home state) than the number of registered voters, and when Nixon lost Illinois despite winning 92 out of 101 counties, many suggested a link between the Kennedy campaign and organized crime syndicates in Chicago. These claims have subsequently been proven to be false, and historians generally agree that Kennedy's campaigning methods and Nixon's wastefulness won Kennedy the election. John F. Kennedy was subsequently named the 35th President of the United States, and is remembered favorably as one of the most popular and charismatic leaders in US history. Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, less than three years into his first term, and was succeeded by his Vice President, Lyndon B. Johnson.

Precinct-level election results and corresponding geography for the Public Opinion Quarterly piece by Amos, McDonald, and Watkins entitled "When Boundaries Collide: Constructing a National Database of Demographic and Voting Statistics"

This study contains an assortment of data files relating to the electoral and demographic history of New York State. Part 1, Mortality Statistics of the Seventh Census, 1850: Place of Birth for United States Cities, contains counts of persons by place of birth for United States cities as reported in the 1850 United States Census. Place of birth is coded for states and for selected foreign countries, and percentages are also included. Part 2, Selected Tables of New York State and United States Censuses of 1835-1875: New York State Counties, contains data from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875, and includes data from the United States Censuses of 1840 and 1850. The bulk of the tables concern church and synagogue membership. The tables for 1835 and 1845 include counts of persons by sex, legal male voters, alien males, not taxed Colored, taxed Colored, and taxed Colored can vote. The 1840 tables include total population, employment by industry, and military pensioners. The 1855 tables provide counts of persons by place of birth. Part 3, New York State Negro Suffrage Referenda Returns, 1846, 1860, and 1869, by Election District, contains returns for 28 election districts on the issue of Negro suffrage, with information on number of votes for, against, and total votes. Also provided are percentages of votes for and against Negro suffrage. Part 4, New York State Liquor License Referendum Returns, 1846, Town Level, contains returns from the Liquor License Referendum held in May 1846. For each town the file provides total number of votes cast, votes for, votes against, and percentage of votes for and against. The source of the data are New York State Assembly Documents, 70 Session, 1847, Document 40. Part 5, New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875: Counts of Churches and Church Membership by Denomination, contains counts of churches, total value of church property, church seating capacity, usual number of persons attending church, and number of church members from the New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875. Counts are by denomination at the state summary level. Part 6, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1830-1875, Town Level, presents town-level data for the elections of 1830, 1834, 1838, 1840, and 1842. The file also includes various summary statistics from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, and 1865 with limited data from the 1840 United States Census. The data for 1835 and 1845 include male eligible voters, aliens not naturalized, non-white persons not taxed, and non-white persons taxed. The data for 1840 include population, employment by industry, and military service pensioners. The data for 1845 cover total population and number of males, place of birth, and churches. The data for 1855 and 1865 provide counts of persons by place of birth, number of dwellings, total value of dwellings, counts of persons by race and sex, number of voters by native and foreign born, and number of families. The data for 1865 also include counts of Colored not taxed and data for churches and synagogues such as number, value, seating capacity, and attendance. The data for 1875 include population, native and foreign born, counts of persons by race, by place of birth, by native, by naturalized citizens, and by alien males aged 21 and over. Part 7, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1844-1865, Town Level, contains town-level data for the state of New York for the elections of 1844 and 1860. It also contains data for 1850 such as counts of persons by sex and race. Data for 1855 includes counts of churches, value of churches and real estate, seating capacity, and church membership. Data for 1860 include date church was founded and source of that information. Also provided are total population counts for the years 1790, 1800, 1814, 1820, 1825, 1830, 1835, 1845, 1856, 1850, 1855, 1860, and 1865. (ICPSR 3/16/2015)

This study contains an assortment of data files relating to the electoral and demographic history of New York State. Part 1, Mortality Statistics of the Seventh Census, 1850: Place of Birth for United States Cities, contains counts of persons by place of birth for United States cities as reported in the 1850 United States Census. Place of birth is coded for states and for selected foreign countries, and percentages are also included. Part 2, Selected Tables of New York State and United States Censuses of 1835-1875: New York State Counties, contains data from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875, and includes data from the United States Censuses of 1840 and 1850. The bulk of the tables concern church and synagogue membership. The tables for 1835 and 1845 include counts of persons by sex, legal male voters, alien males, not taxed Colored, taxed Colored, and taxed Colored can vote. The 1840 tables include total population, employment by industry, and military pensioners. The 1855 tables provide counts of persons by place of birth. Part 3, New York State Negro Suffrage Referenda Returns, 1846, 1860, and 1869, by Election District, contains returns for 28 election districts on the issue of Negro suffrage, with information on number of votes for, against, and total votes. Also provided are percentages of votes for and against Negro suffrage. Part 4, New York State Liquor License Referendum Returns, 1846, Town Level, contains returns from the Liquor License Referendum held in May 1846. For each town the file provides total number of votes cast, votes for, votes against, and percentage of votes for and against. The source of the data are New York State Assembly Documents, 70 Session, 1847, Document 40. Part 5, New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875: Counts of Churches and Church Membership by Denomination, contains counts of churches, total value of church property, church seating capacity, usual number of persons attending church, and number of church members from the New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875. Counts are by denomination at the state summary level. Part 6, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1830-1875, Town Level, presents town-level data for the elections of 1830, 1834, 1838, 1840, and 1842. The file also includes various summary statistics from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, and 1865 with limited data from the 1840 United States Census. The data for 1835 and 1845 include male eligible voters, aliens not naturalized, non-white persons not taxed, and non-white persons taxed. The data for 1840 include population, employment by industry, and military service pensioners. The data for 1845 cover total population and number of males, place of birth, and churches. The data for 1855 and 1865 provide counts of persons by place of birth, number of dwellings, total value of dwellings, counts of persons by race and sex, number of voters by native and foreign born, and number of families. The data for 1865 also include counts of Colored not taxed and data for churches and synagogues such as number, value, seating capacity, and attendance. The data for 1875 include population, native and foreign born, counts of persons by race, by place of birth, by native, by naturalized citizens, and by alien males aged 21 and over. Part 7, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1844-1865, Town Level, contains town-level data for the state of New York for the elections of 1844 and 1860. It also contains data for 1850 such as counts of persons by sex and race. Data for 1855 includes counts of churches, value of churches and real estate, seating capacity, and church membership. Data for 1860 include date church was founded and source of that information. Also provided are total population counts for the years 1790, 1800, 1814, 1820, 1825, 1830, 1835, 1845, 1856, 1850, 1855, 1860, and 1865.

This study contains an assortment of data files relating to the electoral and demographic history of New York State. Part 1, Mortality Statistics of the Seventh Census, 1850: Place of Birth for United States Cities, contains counts of persons by place of birth for United States cities as reported in the 1850 United States Census. Place of birth is coded for states and for selected foreign countries, and percentages are also included. Part 2, Selected Tables of New York State and United States Censuses of 1835-1875: New York State Counties, contains data from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875, and includes data from the United States Censuses of 1840 and 1850. The bulk of the tables concern church and synagogue membership. The tables for 1835 and 1845 include counts of persons by sex, legal male voters, alien males, not taxed Colored, taxed Colored, and taxed Colored can vote. The 1840 tables include total population, employment by industry, and military pensioners. The 1855 tables provide counts of persons by place of birth. Part 3, New York State Negro Suffrage Referenda Returns, 1846, 1860, and 1869, by Election District, contains returns for 28 election districts on the issue of Negro suffrage, with information on number of votes for, against, and total votes. Also provided are percentages of votes for and against Negro suffrage. Part 4, New York State Liquor License Referendum Returns, 1846, Town Level, contains returns from the Liquor License Referendum held in May 1846. For each town the file provides total number of votes cast, votes for, votes against, and percentage of votes for and against. The source of the data are New York State Assembly Documents, 70 Session, 1847, Document 40. Part 5, New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875: Counts of Churches and Church Membership by Denomination, contains counts of churches, total value of church property, church seating capacity, usual number of persons attending church, and number of church members from the New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875. Counts are by denomination at the state summary level. Part 6, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1830-1875, Town Level, presents town-level data for the elections of 1830, 1834, 1838, 1840, and 1842. The file also includes various summary statistics from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, and 1865 with limited data from the 1840 United States Census. The data for 1835 and 1845 include male eligible voters, aliens not naturalized, non-white persons not taxed, and non-white persons taxed. The data for 1840 include population, employment by industry, and military service pensioners. The data for 1845 cover total population and number of males, place of birth, and churches. The data for 1855 and 1865 provide counts of persons by place of birth, number of dwellings, total value of dwellings, counts of persons by race and sex, number of voters by native and foreign born, and number of families. The data for 1865 also include counts of Colored not taxed and data for churches and synagogues such as number, value, seating capacity, and attendance. The data for 1875 include population, native and foreign born, counts of persons by race, by place of birth, by native, by naturalized citizens, and by alien males aged 21 and over. Part 7, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1844-1865, Town Level, contains town-level data for the state of New York for the elections of 1844 and 1860. It also contains data for 1850 such as counts of persons by sex and race. Data for 1855 includes counts of churches, value of churches and real estate, seating capacity, and church membership. Data for 1860 include date church was founded and source of that information. Also provided are total population counts for the years 1790, 1800, 1814, 1820, 1825, 1830, 1835, 1845, 1856, 1850, 1855, 1860, and 1865. (ICPSR 3/16/2015)

The typical statewide or county-wide red/blue map (shown at left) depicts presidential voting results on a winner-take-all basis, so they award an entire geographical area to the Republican or Democratic candidate no matter how close the actual vote tally The large map in the attachment factors in both the percentage of the popular vote won by each candidate as well as the population density of each county. So, the sparsely populated Great Plains and Rocky Mountain West are shown in a much lighter color than the Eastern Seaboard, and the map as a whole is more purple than either red or blue. Perhaps the United States is less divided than some maps would lead us to believe.

According to exit polling in *** key states of the 2024 presidential election in the United States, almost ********** of voters who had never attended college reported voting for Donald Trump. In comparison, a similar share of voters with ******** degrees reported voting for Kamala Harris.

California bond and tax election data including election date, election type, agency, county, type, amount, purpose, measure, vote threshold, vote results for election dating back to 1986.

For researchers and analysts focused on public administration, political science, economics, and finance, the dataset offers a detailed empirical foundation to study the dynamics of public opinion and its influence on policy-making.

Data scientists can use this dataset to perform several specific analyses:

• Predictive Analysis: Using historical data to predict the outcomes of future tax-related measures based on factors such as the economic climate, previous voting patterns, and demographic data of voters.
• Trend Analysis: Analyzing long-term trends in voter behavior towards specific types of taxes or debts, such as increased or decreased support for school funding or infrastructure projects over time.
• Correlation Analysis: Determining the relationships between the success rates of measures and various external factors such as the economic status, the wording of the measure, or the type of tax.

In advanced democracies, many citizens abstain from participating in the political process. Does low and unequal voter turnout influence partisan election results or public policies? If so, how can participation be increased and how can the electorate become more representative of the greater population? Study 1 examines the adoption of compulsory voting laws in Australia in order to assess the effects of near-universal turnout. When new, working class voters were brought the polls Aus tralia saw significant changes in election results and public policy. Study 2 explores the partisan consequences of marginal changes in voter turnout in the United States by comparing the partisan preferences of regular and marginal voters. Across three independent tests and settings, marginal voters are significantly more supportive of the Democratic Party compared to regular voters. Studies 3 and 4 examine several potential cures for low turnout. Study 3 examines the common view that social capital and community participation will increase political participation, a claim that has not been rigorously tested. Exploiting the timing of saint’s day fiestas in Mexico and a change in the Mexican electoral calendar, this study finds that social capital and community engagement appear to be substitutes rather than complements for political participation. Study 4 tests another widely held view that increased electoral competition will boost electoral participation, but a range of tests finds little support for this hypothesis. Finally, Study 5 demonstrates that marginal increases in voter turnout will not necessarily make the electorate more representative of the greater population. Get-out-the-vote interventions have been shown to increase turnout si gnificantly and they are widely touted as beneficial for democracy, but surprisingly, these interventions actually increase inequalities in turnout by primarily mobilizing more of the types of citizens who were already voting. In short, low voter turnout and inequalities in voter turnout have significant political and policy consequences, but the problem is hard to fix. Even seemingly benign cures like social capital, electoral competition, and voter mobilization have little benefit or may even be detrimental. Complete date fields below for: time period covered; and date of collection

The Record of American Democracy (ROAD) data provide election returns, socioeconomic summaries, and demographic details about the American public at unusually low levels of geographic aggregation. The NSF-supported ROAD project spans every state in the country from 1984 through 1990 (including some off-year elections). These data enable research on topics such as electoral behavior, the political characteristics of local community context, electoral geography, the role of minority groups in elections and legislative redistricting, split ticket voting and divided government, and elections under federalism. Another set of files has added to these roughly 30-40 political variables an additional 3,725 variables merged from the 1990 United States Census for 47,327 aggregate units called MCD Groups. The MCD Group is a construct for purposes of this data collection. It is based on a merging of the electoral precincts and Census Minor Civil Divisions (MCDs). An MCD is about the size of a city or town. An MCD Group is smaller than or equal to a county and (except in California) is greater than or equal to the size of an MCD. The MCD Group units completely tile the United States landmass. This particular study contains the files for the State Level MCD Group Data for the state of Kansas. Documentation and frequently asked questions are available online at the ROAD Website. A downloadable PDF codebook is also available in the files section of this study.