Every 10 years, the number of seats a state has in the U.S. House of Representatives, and therefore the Electoral College, changes based on population. While many states experienced no change in representation due to the 2020 Census, a few states gained or lost seats. Texas notably gained two seats due to an increase in population, while New York, Michigan, California, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois all lost one seat.

This change will stay in place until 2030, when the next Census is conducted in the United States.

This web map displays data from the voter registration database as the percent of registered voters by census tract in King County, Washington. The data for this web map is compiled from King County Elections voter registration data for the years 2013-2019. The total number of registered voters is based on the geo-location of the voter's registered address at the time of the general election for each year. The eligible voting population, age 18 and over, is based on the estimated population increase from the US Census Bureau and the Washington Office of Financial Management and was calculated as a projected 6 percent population increase for the years 2010-2013, 7 percent population increase for the years 2010-2014, 9 percent population increase for the years 2010-2015, 11 percent population increase for the years 2010-2016 & 2017, 14 percent population increase for the years 2010-2018 and 17 percent population increase for the years 2010-2019. The total population 18 and over in 2010 was 1,517,747 in King County, Washington. The percentage of registered voters represents the number of people who are registered to vote as compared to the eligible voting population, age 18 and over. The voter registration data by census tract was grouped into six percentage range estimates: 50% or below, 51-60%, 61-70%, 71-80%, 81-90% and 91% or above with an overall 84 percent registration rate. In the map the lighter colors represent a relatively low percentage range of voter registration and the darker colors represent a relatively high percentage range of voter registration. PDF maps of these data can be viewed at King County Elections downloadable voter registration maps. The 2019 General Election Voter Turnout layer is voter turnout data by historical precinct boundaries for the corresponding year. The data is grouped into six percentage ranges: 0-30%, 31-40%, 41-50% 51-60%, 61-70%, and 71-100%. The lighter colors represent lower turnout and the darker colors represent higher turnout. The King County Demographics Layer is census data for language, income, poverty, race and ethnicity at the census tract level and is based on the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5 year Average provided by the United States Census Bureau. Since the data is based on a survey, they are considered to be estimates and should be used with that understanding. The demographic data sets were developed and are maintained by King County Staff to support the King County Equity and Social Justice program. Other data for this map is located in the King County GIS Spatial Data Catalog, where data is managed by the King County GIS Center, a multi-department enterprise GIS in King County, Washington. King County has nearly 1.3 million registered voters and is the largest jurisdiction in the United States to conduct all elections by mail. In the map you can view the percent of registered voters by census tract, compare registration within political districts, compare registration and demographic data, verify your voter registration or register to vote through a link to the VoteWA, Washington State Online Voter Registration web page.

The downloadable ZIP file contains Esri shapefiles and PDF maps. Contains the information used to determine the location of the new legislative and congressional district boundaries for the state of Idaho as adopted by Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting on March 9, 2002. Contains viewable and printable legislative and congressional district maps, viewable and printable reports, and importable geographic data files.These data were contributed to INSIDE Idaho at the University of Idaho Library in 2001. CD/DVD -ROM availability: https://alliance-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/m1uotc/CP71156191150001451These files were created by a six-person, by-partisan commission, consisting of six commission members, three democrats and three republicans. This commission was given 90 days to redraw congressional and legislative district boundaries for the state of Idaho. Due to lawsuits, the process was extended. This legislative plan was approved by the commission on March 9th, 2002 and was previously called L97. All digital data originates from TIGER/Line files and 2000 U.S. Census data.Frequently asked questions:How often are Idaho's legislative and congressional districts redrawn? Once every ten years after each census, as required by law, or when directed by the Idaho Supreme Court. The most recent redistricting followed the 2000 census. Redistricting is not expected to occur again in Idaho until after the 2010 census. Who redrew Idaho's legislative and congressional districts? In 2001, for the first time, Idaho used a citizens' commission to redraw its legislative and congressional district boundaries. Before Idaho voters amended the state Constitution in 1994 to create a Redistricting Commission, redistricting was done by a committee of the Idaho Legislature. The committee's new district plans then had to pass the Legislature before becoming law. Who was on the Redistricting Commission? Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting was composed of Co-Chairmen Kristi Sellers of Chubbuck and Tom Stuart of Boise and Stanley. The other four members were Raymond Givens of Coeur d'Alene, Dean Haagenson of Hayden Lake, Karl Shurtliff of Boise, John Hepworth of Buhl (who resigned effective December 4, 2001), and Derlin Taylor of Burley (who was appointed to replace Mr. Hepworth). What are the requirements for being a Redistricting Commissioner? According to Idaho Law, no person may serve on the commission who: 1. Is not a registered voter of the state at the time of selection; or 2. Is or has been within one (1) year a registered lobbyist; or 3. Is or has been within two (2) years prior to selection an elected official or elected legislative district, county or state party officer. (This requirement does not apply to precinct committeepersons.) The individual appointing authorities may consider additional criteria beyond these statutory requirements. Idaho law also prohibits a person who has served on the Redistricting Commission from serving in either house of the legislature for five years following their service on the commission. When did Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting meet? Idaho law allows the Commission only 90 days to conduct its business. The Redistricting Commission was formed on June 5, 2001. Its 90-day time period would expire on September 3, 2001. After holding hearings around the state in June and July, a majority of the Commission voted to adopt new legislative and congressional districts on August 22, 2001. On November 29th, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled the Commission's legislative redistricting plan unconstitutional and directed them to reconvene and adopt an alternative plan. The Commission did so, adopting a new plan on January 8, 2000. The Idaho Supreme Court found the Commission's second legislative map unconstitutional on March 1, 2002 and ordered the Commission to try again. The Commission adopted a third plan on March 9, 2002. The Supreme Court denied numerous challenges to this third map. It then became the basis for the 2002 primary and General elections and is expected to be used until the 2012 elections. What is the basic timetable for Idaho to redraw its legislative and congressional districts?Typically, and according to Idaho law, the Redistricting Commission cannot be formally convened until after Idaho has received the official census counts and not before June 1 of a year ending in one. Idaho's first Commission on redistricting was officially created on June 5, 2001. By law, a Commission then has 90 days (or until September 3, 2001 in the case of Idaho's first Commission) to approve new legislative and congressional district boundaries based on the most recent census figures. If at least four of the six commissioners fail to approve new legislative and congressional district plans before that 90-day time period expires, the Commission will cease to exist. The law is silent as to what happens next. Could you summarize the important dates for Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting one more time please? After January 1, 2001 but before April 1, 2001: As required by federal law, the Census Bureau must deliver to the states the small area population counts upon which redistricting is based. The Census Bureau determines the exact date within this window when Idaho will get its population figures. Idaho's were delivered on March 23, 2001. Why conduct a census anyway? The original and still primary reason for conducting a national census every ten years is to determine how the 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives are to be apportioned among the 50 states. Each state receives its share of the 435 seats in the U.S. House based on the proportion of its population to that of the total U.S. population. For example, the population shifts during the 1990's resulted in the Northeastern states losing population and therefore seats in Congress to the Southern and the Western states. What is reapportionment? Reapportionment is a federal issue that applies only to Congress. It is the process of dividing up the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the 50 states based on each state's proportion of the total U.S. population as determined by the most recent census. Apportionment determines the each state's power, as expressed by the size of their congressional delegation, in Congress and, through the electoral college, directly affects the selection of the president (each state's number of votes in the electoral college equals the number of its representatives and senators in Congress). Like all states, Idaho has two U.S. senators. Based on our 1990 population of 1,006,000 people and our 2000 population of 1,293,953, and relative to the populations of the other 49 states, Idaho will have two seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Even with the state's 28.5% population increase from 1990 to 2000, Idaho will not be getting a third seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. Assuming Idaho keeps growing at the same rate it did through the decade of the 1990's, it will likely be 30 or 40 years (after 3 or 4 more censuses) before Idaho gets a third congressional seat. What is redistricting? Redistricting is the process of redrawing the boundaries of legislative and congressional districts within each state to achieve population equality among all congressional districts and among all legislative districts. The U.S. Constitution requires this be done for all congressional districts after each decennial census. The Idaho Constitution also requires that this be done for all legislative districts after each census. The democratic principle behind redistricting is "one person, one vote." Requiring that districts be of equal population ensures that every elected state legislator or U.S. congressman represents very close to the same number of people in that state, therefore, each citizen's vote will carry the same weight. How are reapportionment and redistricting related to the census? The original and still primary reason for conducting a census every ten years is to apportion the (now) 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the several states. The census records population changes and is the legally recognized basis for redrawing electoral districts of equal population. Why is redistricting so important? In a democracy, it is important for all citizens to have equal representation. The political parties also see redistricting as an opportunity to draw districts that favor electing their members and, conversely, that are unfavorable for electing their political opposition. (It's for this reason that redistricting has been described as "the purest form of political bloodsport.") What is PL 94-171? Public Law (PL) 94-171 (Title 13, United States Code) was enacted by Congress in 1975. It was intended to provide state legislatures with small-area census population totals for use in redistricting. The law's origins lie with the "one person, one vote" court decisions in the 1960's. State legislatures needed to reconcile Census Bureau's small geographic area boundaries with voting tabulation districts (precincts) boundaries to create legislative districts with balanced populations. The Census Bureau worked with state legislatures and others to meet this need beginning with the 1980 census. The resulting Public Law 94-171 allows states to work voluntarily with the Census Bureau to match voting district boundaries with small-area census boundaries. With this done, the Bureau can report to those participating states the census population totals broken down by major race group and Hispanic origin for the total population and for persons aged 18 years and older for each census subdivision. Idaho participated in the Bureau's Census 2000 Redistricting Data Program and, where counties used visible features to delineate precinct boundaries, matched those boundaries with census reporting areas. In those instances where counties did not use visible features to

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.

Population forecasts suggest that the redistribution of the electoral college following Census 2010 and 2020 will likely benefit Southern and Western states at the expense of Northeastern states. In the short term, an electoral gain for strongly Republican states like Texas and Arizona may benefit Republican presidential candidates. But what can these population forecasts tell us about the major parties' long term electoral prospects? Burmila (2009) develops an updated model of Converse's (1966) "normal vote" to make inferences about the effect of electoral vote changes on the 2012-2028 presidential elections. Here, we test Burmila's model against known election results to derive a measure of the model's uncertainty. Our results suggest that a normal vote model (1) does not take into account the variance in state voting patterns, (2) does not make clear the limitations of its predictive power as it is applied farther in the future, and (3) is overly dependent on recent election results. We develop an improved model that corrects for these limitations. We find that the short-term boost to the Republican party is likely smaller than Burmila anticipates, and that long term predictions are too uncertain to report. We conclude by suggesting a more dynamic model of voting trends that accounts for changing demographics in temporally-distant predictions.

Population aged 5 years and over by time leaving home to travel to work, school or college by Local Electoral Areas. (Census 2022 Theme 11 Table 2 )Census 2022 table 11.2 is population aged 5+ by time leaving home to travel to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by time leaving for work, school or college. Census 2022 theme 11 is Commuting, Working from Home and Childcare. For the purposes of Local Authority elections, each county and city is divided into Local Electoral Areas (LEAs) which are constituted on the basis of Orders made under the Local Government Act, 1941. Statutory Instruments 610-638 of 2018 and 6-8, 27-28, 156-157 of 2019 state the current composition of LEAs.In general, LEAs are formed by aggregating Electoral Divisions. However, in a number of cases, Electoral Divisions are split between LEAs and in order to render them suitable for the production of statistics, the CSO has amended some LEA boundaries to ensure that statistical disclosure does not occur. As a result of these amendments, Census 2022 LEAs are comprised of whole Census 2022 Electoral Divisions.Coordinate reference system: Irish Transverse Mercator (EPSG 2157). These boundaries are based on 20m generalised boundaries sourced from Tailte Éireann Open Data Portal. CSO Local Electoral Areas 2022

This feature layer was created using Census 2016 data produced by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and Local Electoral Area boundary data (generalised to 20m) produced by Tailte Éireann. The layer represents Census 2016 theme 11.1, population aged 5+ by means of travel to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by means of travel to work, school or college (e.g. bicycle, car driver, on foot). Census 2016 theme 11 represents Commuting. The Census is carried out every five years by the CSO to determine an account of every person in Ireland. The results provide information on a range of themes, such as, population, housing and education. The data were sourced from the CSO.For the purposes of County Council and Corporation elections each county and city is divided into Local Electoral Areas (LEAs) which are constituted on the basis of Orders made under the Local Government Act, 1941. In general, LEAs are formed by aggregating Electoral Divisions. However, in a number of cases Electoral Divisions are divided between LEAs to facilitate electors. The current composition of the LEAs have been established by Statutory Instruments No’s 427-452/2008, 503-509/2008 and 311/1998.

Census statistics play a key role in public policy decisions and social science research. However, given the risk of revealing individual information, many statistical agencies are considering disclosure control methods based on differential privacy, which add noise to tabulated data. Unlike other applications of differential privacy, however, census statistics must be postprocessed after noise injection to be usable. We study the impact of the U.S. Census Bureau’s latest disclosure avoidance system (DAS) on a major application of census statistics, the redrawing of electoral districts. We find that the DAS systematically undercounts the population in mixed-race and mixed-partisan precincts, yielding unpredictable racial and partisan biases. While the DAS leads to a likely violation of the “One Person, One Vote” standard as currently interpreted, it does not prevent accurate predictions of an individual’s race and ethnicity. Our findings underscore the difficulty of balancing accuracy and respondent privacy in the Census.

While recent research on the origins of proportional representation (PR) in Europe has focused on domestic political explanations, we bring international trade back as an economic explanation for the politics of electoral system choice. Spurred by Rogowski’s (1987) theory of the trade origins of PR and the political economy literature on trade policy, we argue that political conflict over trade shaped the struggle over electoral reform during the first globalization. Because tariffs were a central and contested issue, economic interests hurt by rising tariffs under the old electoral system have economic motives to support the introduction of PR. To conduct a missing test of the theory, we leverage district level popular votes in Switzerland using a within-country research design. We find support for the core mechanism of the trade theory: demand for protectionism entailed stronger opposition to the introduction of PR. Using panel data, we demonstrate that changes in the relative size of the agricultural sector, the central pillar of support for protectionism, were closely related to changes in support for PR. We also examine legislative voting in Germany, and find that protectionism was linked to subsequent opposition to electoral reform. Altogether, our analysis highlights the relatively overlooked importance of trade in conflict over electoral institutions.

This statistic displays the number of registered voters in Spain residing abroad from 2008 to 2023. As of May 1st, 2023, the number of Spanish citizens aged over 18 years old and living abroad was slightly over 2.32 million.

Population aged 5 years and over by means of travel to work, school or college by Local Electoral Areas. (Census 2022 Theme 11 Table 1 )Census 2022 table 11.1 is population aged 5+ by means of travel to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by means of travel to work, school or college. Census 2022 theme 11 is Commuting, Working from Home and Childcare. For the purposes of Local Authority elections, each county and city is divided into Local Electoral Areas (LEAs) which are constituted on the basis of Orders made under the Local Government Act, 1941. Statutory Instruments 610-638 of 2018 and 6-8, 27-28, 156-157 of 2019 state the current composition of LEAs.In general, LEAs are formed by aggregating Electoral Divisions. However, in a number of cases, Electoral Divisions are split between LEAs and in order to render them suitable for the production of statistics, the CSO has amended some LEA boundaries to ensure that statistical disclosure does not occur. As a result of these amendments, Census 2022 LEAs are comprised of whole Census 2022 Electoral Divisions.Coordinate reference system: Irish Transverse Mercator (EPSG 2157). These boundaries are based on 20m generalised boundaries sourced from Tailte Éireann Open Data Portal. CSO Local Electoral Areas 2022

Analysis of ‘US non-voters poll data’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/yamqwe/us-non-voters-poll-datae on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

About this dataset

This dataset contains the data behind Why Many Americans Don't Vote.

Data presented here comes from polling done by Ipsos for FiveThirtyEight, using Ipsos’s KnowledgePanel, a probability-based online panel that is recruited to be representative of the U.S. population. The poll was conducted from Sept. 15 to Sept. 25 among a sample of U.S. citizens that oversampled young, Black and Hispanic respondents, with 8,327 respondents, and was weighted according to general population benchmarks for U.S. citizens from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey March 2019 Supplement. The voter file company Aristotle then matched respondents to a voter file to more accurately understand their voting history using the panelist’s first name, last name, zip code, and eight characters of their address, using the National Change of Address program if applicable. Sixty-four percent of the sample (5,355 respondents) matched, although we also included respondents who did not match the voter file but described themselves as voting “rarely” or “never” in our survey, so as to avoid underrepresenting nonvoters, who are less likely to be included in the voter file to begin with. We dropped respondents who were only eligible to vote in three elections or fewer. We defined those who almost always vote as those who voted in all (or all but one) of the national elections (presidential and midterm) they were eligible to vote in since 2000; those who vote sometimes as those who voted in at least two elections, but fewer than all the elections they were eligible to vote in (or all but one); and those who rarely or never vote as those who voted in no elections, or just one.

The data included here is the final sample we used: 5,239 respondents who matched to the voter file and whose verified vote history we have, and 597 respondents who did not match to the voter file and described themselves as voting "rarely" or "never," all of whom have been eligible for at least 4 elections.

If you find this information useful, please let us know.

License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Source: https://github.com/fivethirtyeight/data/tree/master/non-voters

This dataset was created by data.world's Admin and contains around 6000 samples along with Race, Q27 6, technical information and other features such as: - Q4 6 - Q8 3 - and more.

How to use this dataset

• Analyze Q10 3 in relation to Q8 6
• Study the influence of Q6 on Q10 4
• More datasets

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit data.world's Admin

Start A New Notebook!

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

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.

Electoral results since 1983 by municipalities, with indication of municipality, number of tables, electoral census, votes cast, null votes, blank votes, valid votes, percentage counted and votes received by each political party

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.

• Description: On Friday 7 June 2024, the central vote of the European Parliament election took place in the municipality of Utrecht. At that time, all the votes of the election on 6 June 2024 were counted per candidate. All these counts are in the minutes of the municipal polling station. It was signed on 10 June 2024. The censuses have been introduced in the supporting software elections (OSV). From this software comes the count file. The census file contains all votes per polling station per party per candidate. You can use the file to check the results. You can also use the file to perform your own analyses or create visualizations.

• Source: Municipality of Utrecht

• Restrictions: We publish the census file to make the elections open and transparent. You cannot derive any rights from the file.

• Possibilities: You can use this file to view the results, perform analyses, create visualizations, etc.

This feature layer was created using Census 2016 data produced by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and Local Electoral Area boundary data (generalised to 20m) produced by Tailte Éireann. The layer represents Census 2016 theme 11.3, population aged 5+ by journey time to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by time taken to travel to work, school or college (e.g. 1/4 hour - under 1/2 hour, 1 hours - under 1 1/2 hours). Census 2016 theme 11 represents Commuting. The Census is carried out every five years by the CSO to determine an account of every person in Ireland. The results provide information on a range of themes, such as, population, housing and education. The data were sourced from the CSO.For the purposes of County Council and Corporation elections each county and city is divided into Local Electoral Areas (LEAs) which are constituted on the basis of Orders made under the Local Government Act, 1941. In general, LEAs are formed by aggregating Electoral Divisions. However, in a number of cases Electoral Divisions are divided between LEAs to facilitate electors. The current composition of the LEAs have been established by Statutory Instruments No’s 427-452/2008, 503-509/2008 and 311/1998.

This table is part of a series of tables that present a portrait of Canada based on the various census topics. The tables range in complexity and levels of geography. Content varies from a simple overview of the country to complex cross-tabulations; the tables may also cover several censuses.

This feature layer was created using Census 2016 data produced by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and Local Electoral Area boundary data (generalised to 20m) produced by Tailte Éireann. The layer represents Census 2016 theme 11.2, population aged 5+ by time leaving home to travel to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by time leaving for work, school or college (e.g. 6.30 - 7.00, 8.30 - 9.00). Census 2016 theme 11 represents Commuting. The Census is carried out every five years by the CSO to determine an account of every person in Ireland. The results provide information on a range of themes, such as, population, housing and education. The data were sourced from the CSO.For the purposes of County Council and Corporation elections each county and city is divided into Local Electoral Areas (LEAs) which are constituted on the basis of Orders made under the Local Government Act, 1941. In general, LEAs are formed by aggregating Electoral Divisions. However, in a number of cases Electoral Divisions are divided between LEAs to facilitate electors. The current composition of the LEAs have been established by Statutory Instruments No’s 427-452/2008, 503-509/2008 and 311/1998.