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.

Every four years in the United States, the electoral college system is used to determine the winner of the presidential election. In this system, each state has a fixed number of electors based on their population size, and (generally speaking) these electors then vote for their candidate with the most popular votes within their state or district. Since 1964, there have been 538 electoral votes available for presidential candidates, who need a minimum of 270 votes to win the election. Because of this system, candidates do not have to win over fifty percent of the popular votes across the country, but just win in enough states to receive a total of 270 electoral college votes. The use of this system is a source of debate in the U.S.; those in favor claim that it prevents candidates from focusing on the interests of urban populations, and must also appeal to smaller and less-populous states, and they say that this system preserves federalism and the two-party system. However, critics argue that this system does not represent the will of the majority of American voters, and that it encourages candidates to disproportionally focus on winning in swing states, where the outcome is more difficult to predict. Popular results From 1789 until 1820, there was no popular vote, and the President was then chosen only by the electors from each state. George Washington was unanimously voted for by the electorate, receiving one hundred percent of the votes in both elections. From 1824, the popular vote has been conducted among American citizens, to help electors decide who to vote for (although the 1824 winner was chosen by the House of Representatives, as no candidate received over fifty percent of electoral votes). Since 1924, the difference in the share of both votes has varied, with several candidates receiving over ninety percent of the electoral votes while only receiving between fifty and sixty percent of the popular vote. The highest difference was for Ronald Reagan in 1980, where he received just 50.4 percent of the popular vote, but 90.9 percent of the electoral votes. Unpopular winners Since 1824, there have been 49 elections, and in 18 of these the winner did not receive over fifty percent of the popular vote. In the majority of these cases, the winner did receive a plurality of the votes, however there have been five instances where the winner of the electoral college vote lost the popular vote to another candidate. The most recent examples of this were in 2000, when George W. Bush received roughly half a million fewer votes than Al Gore, and in 2016, where Hillary Clinton won approximately three million more votes than Donald Trump.

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 Voter Participation indicator presents voter turnout in Champaign County as a percentage, calculated using two different methods.

In the first method, the voter turnout percentage is calculated using the number of ballots cast compared to the total population in the county that is eligible to vote. In the second method, the voter turnout percentage is calculated using the number of ballots cast compared to the number of registered voters in the county.

Since both methods are in use by other agencies, and since there are real differences in the figures that both methods return, we have provided the voter participation rate for Champaign County using each method.

Voter participation is a solid illustration of a community’s engagement in the political process at the federal and state levels. One can infer a high level of political engagement from high voter participation rates.

The voter participation rate calculated using the total eligible population is consistently lower than the voter participation rate calculated using the number of registered voters, since the number of registered voters is smaller than the total eligible population.

There are consistent trends in both sets of data: the voter participation rate, no matter how it is calculated, shows large spikes in presidential election years (e.g., 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020) and smaller spikes in intermediary even years (e.g., 2010, 2014, 2018, 2022). The lowest levels of voter participation can be seen in odd years (e.g., 2015, 2017, 2019, 2021, 2023).

This data primarily comes from the election results resources on the Champaign County Clerk website. Election results resources from Champaign County include the number of ballots cast and the number of registered voters. The results are published frequently, following each election.

Data on the total eligible population for Champaign County was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau, using American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates for each year starting in 2005, when the American Community Survey was created. The estimates are released annually by the Census Bureau.

Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because this data is not available for Champaign County, the eligible voting population for 2020 is not included in this Indicator.

For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes datasets on Population by Sex and Population Under 18 Years by Age.

Sources: Champaign County Clerk Historical Election Data; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (10 October 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (5 October 2023).; Champaign County Clerk Historical Election Data; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (7 October 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; Champaign County Clerk Election History; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 May 2019).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 May 2019).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (6 March 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B05003; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (15 March 2016).

According to exit polling in the 2020 Presidential Election in the United States, 62 percent of surveyed 18 to 29 year old voters reported voting for former Vice President Joe Biden. In the race to become the next president of the United States, 51 percent of voters aged 65 and older reported voting for incumbent President Donald Trump.

According to exit polling in ten key states of the 2024 presidential election in the United States, 57 percent of surveyed white voters reported voting for Donald Trump. In contrast, 85 percent of Black voters reported voting for Kamala Harris.

Total population, population density, migration, and voting age population by year. Includes population estimates and projections prepared by the NC State Demographer.

The 1998 Dress Rehearsal was conducted as a prelude to the United States Census of Population and Housing, 2000, in the following locations: (1) Columbia, South Carolina, and surrounding areas, including the town of Irmo and the counties of Chester, Chesterfield, Darlington, Fairfield, Kershaw, Lancaster, Lee, Marlboro, Newberry, Richland, and Union, (2) Sacramento, California, and (3) Menominee County, Wisconsin, including the Menominee American Indian Reservation. This collection contains map files showing various levels of geography (in the form of Census Tract Outline Maps, Voting District/State Legislative District Outline Maps, and County Block Maps), TIGER/Line digital files, and Corner Point files for the Census 2000 Dress Rehearsal sites. The Corner Point data files contain the bounding latitude and longitude coordinates for each individual map sheet of the 1998 Dress Rehearsal Public Law (P.L.) 94-171 map products. These files include a sheet identifier, minimum and maximum longitude, minimum and maximum latitude, and the map scale (integer value) for each map sheet. The latitude and longitude coordinates are in decimal degrees and expressed as integer values with six implied decimal places. There is a separate Corner Point File for each of the three map types: County Block Map, Census Tract Outline Map, and Voting District/State Legislative District Outline Map. Each of the three map file types is provided in two formats: Portable Document Format (PDF), for viewing, and Hewlett-Packard Graphics Language (HP-GL) format, for plotting. The County Block Maps show the greatest detail and the most complete set of geographic information of all the maps. These large-scale maps depict the smallest geographic entities for which the Census Bureau presents data -- the census blocks -- by displaying the features that delineate them and the numbers that identify them. These maps show the boundaries, names, and codes for American Indian/Alaska Native areas, county subdivisions, places, census tracts, and, for this series, the geographic entities that the states delineated in Phase 2, Voting District Project, of the Redistricting Data Program. The HP-GL version of the County Block Maps is broken down into index maps and map sheets. The map sheets cover a small area, and the index maps are composed of multiple map sheets, showing the entire area. The intent of the County Block Map series is to provide a map for each county on the smallest possible number of map sheets at the maximum practical scale, dependent on the area size of the county and the density of the block pattern. The latter affects the display of block numbers and feature identifiers. The Census Tract Outline Maps show the boundaries and numbers of census tracts, and name the features underlying the boundaries. These maps also show the boundaries and names of counties, county subdivisions, and places. They identify census tracts in relation to governmental unit boundaries. The mapping unit is the county. These large-format maps are produced to support the P.L. 94-171 program and all other 1998 Dress Rehearsal data tabulations. The Voting District/State Legislative District Outline Maps show the boundaries and codes for voting districts as delineated by the states in Phase 2, Voting District Project, of the Redistricting Data Program. The features underlying the voting district boundaries are shown, as well as the names of these features. Additionally, for states that submit the information, these maps show the boundaries and codes for state legislative districts and their underlying features. These maps also show the boundaries of and names of American Indian/Alaska Native areas, counties, county subdivisions, and places. The scale of the district maps is optimized to keep the number of map sheets for each area to a minimum, but the scale and number of map sheets will vary by the area size of the county and the voting districts and state legislative districts delineated by the states. The Census 2000 Dress Rehearsal TIGER/Line Files consist of line segments representing physical features and governmental and statistical boundaries. The files contain information distributed over a series of record types for the spatial objects of a county. These TIGER/Line Files are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the Census TIGER (Topological

The map shows the count of voting age population, registered voters, and actual voters in the 2004, 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. Source: Council of State Governments, Book of the States

Florida was admitted to the union in 1845, and has taken part in 43 U.S. presidential elections since this time. In these 43 elections, Florida has voted for the overall winner thirty times, giving a success rate of seventy percent. Since 1928, Florida has voted for the winning candidate in 21 out of 24 elections, and is considered a key battleground state in modern elections. Florida has voted for a major party nominee in every election, backing the Republican nominee 17 times, Democrat 25 times, and the only time it did not vote Republican or Democrat was in 1848 when it voted for the Whig Party's Zachary Taylor. Florida did not take part in the 1864 election due to its secession from the Union in the American Civil War, and like most other southern states it primarily voted Democrat until the mid-twentieth century, when it then started leaning more Republican. No U.S. President has ever been born in Florida, or resided there when taking office; although Donald Trump declared himself a resident of Florida in 2019, therefore making it his official home state during the 2020 election. The 2020 election in Florida proved to be a surprise for many, as Donald Trump won the popular vote by a 3.4 percent margin; most polls had favored Biden going into election day, however intensive campaigning and increased Republican support among Cuban Americans has been cited as the reason for Trump's victory in Florida.

Florida's importance

In 1920, Florida's population was fewer than one million people; however it has grown drastically in the past century to almost 22 million people, making Florida the third most populous state in the country. With this population boom, Florida's allocation of electoral votes has surged, from just six in the 1920s, to 29 in recent elections (this is expected to increase to 31 votes in the 2024 election). Unlike the other most populous states, such as California and New York, which are considered safe Democratic states, or Texas, which is considered a safe Republican state, presidential elections in Florida are much more unpredictable. Florida is a southern state, and its majority-white, rural and suburban districts tend to vote in favor of the Republican Party (Republicans have also dominated state elections in recent decades), although, Florida is also home to substantial Hispanic population, and is a popular destination for young workers in the tourism sector and retirees from across the U.S., with these groups considered more likely to vote Democrat. However, the discrepancy between voters of Cuban (58 percent voted Republican) and Puerto Rican (66 percent voted Democrat) origin in the 2020 election shows that these traditional attitudes towards Hispanic voters may need to be re-evaluated.

2000 controversy The 2000 U.S. presidential election is one of the most famous and controversial elections in U.S. history, due to the results from Florida. The election was contested by the Republican Party's George W. Bush and the Democratic Party's Al Gore; by the end of election day, it became clear that Florida's 25 electoral votes would decide the outcome, as neither candidate had surpassed the 270 vote margin needed to win nationwide. While Florida's early results showed Bush in the lead, Gore's share of the results in urban areas then brought their totals close enough to trigger a recount; after a month of recounts and legal proceedings, Bush was eventually declared the winner of Florida by a margin of 537 popular votes (or 0.009 percent). Although Gore did win a plurality of the votes nationwide, Bush had won 271 electoral votes overall, and was named the 43rd President of the United States; this was just one of five elections where the candidate with the most popular votes did not win the election. In the six most recent U.S. presidential elections in Florida, the difference in the share of popular votes between the Republican and Democratic candidates has been just two percent on average.

US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 2021, 5-year estimates of the key demographic characteristics of Census Tracts geographic level in Orange County, California. The data contains 105 fields for the variable groups D01: Sex and age (universe: total population, table X1, 49 fields); D02: Median age by sex and race (universe: total population, table X1, 12 fields); D03: Race (universe: total population, table X2, 8 fields); D04: Race alone or in combination with one or more other races (universe: total population, table X2, 7 fields); D05: Hispanic or Latino and race (universe: total population, table X3, 21 fields), and; D06: Citizen voting age population (universe: citizen, 18 and over, table X5, 8 fields). The US Census geodemographic data are based on the 2021 TigerLines across multiple geographies. The spatial geographies were merged with ACS data tables. See full documentation at the OCACS project GitHub page (https://github.com/ktalexan/OCACS-Geodemographics).

The Galesburg Board of Election Commissioners is required to change the boundaries of election precincts after each ten-year Census following the completion of Congressional, Legislative and County Board redistricting. Such precincts shall contain as nearly as practicable 1,200 registered voters.This map illustrates the adopted Wards.

The percentage of persons over the age of 18 registered to vote out of all persons 18 years and over. Source: Baltimore City Board of Elections Years Available: 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018

Boundaries of Orleans Parish voting precincts as defined by the New Orleans City Charter. New Orleans voting precincts are drawn according to the New Orleans Home Rule Charter as required by the State of Louisiana. A precinct is defined in the state of Louisiana's election code as the smallest political unit of a ward having defined geographical boundaries. Precinct boundaries were updated September 25, 2015, in order to satisfy population changes discovered by the Orleans Registrar of Voters Office. The changes have been made by the City of New Orleans and verified by the Louisiana Secretary of State's Office. Information about voter registation can be found here: https://www.sos.la.gov/ElectionsAndVoting/Pages/RegistrationStatisticsParish.aspx https://www.municode.com/library/la/new_orleans/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICO_CH58EL_ARTIIELPRState LawRS 18:532. Establishment of precinctsA. Subject to the provisions of R.S. 18:532.1 and 1903, the governing authority of each parish shall establish precincts, define the territorial limits for which each precinct is established, prescribe their boundaries, and designate the precincts. The governing authority of each parish shall by ordinance adopt the establishment and boundaries of each precinct in accordance with the timetable as set forth herein and in accordance with R.S. 18:532.1.B.(1)(a) Each precinct shall be a contiguous, compact area having clearly defined and clearly observable boundaries coinciding with visible features readily distinguishable on the ground and approved extensions of such features, such as designated highways, roads, streets, rivers, or canals, and depicted on United States Bureau of the Census base maps for the next federal decennial census, except where the precinct boundary is coterminous with the boundary of a parish or an incorporated place when the boundaries of a single precinct contain the entire geographic area of the incorporated place. Except as otherwise provided in this Paragraph, on and after July 1, 1997, any precinct boundary which does not coincide with a visible feature shall be changed by the parish governing authority to coincide with a visible feature in accordance with R.S. 18:532.1.(b) For the purposes of this Paragraph, the term "approved extension" shall mean an extension of one visible feature to another visible feature which has been approved by the secretary of the Senate and the clerk of the House of Representatives or their designees and which is or which will be a census tabulation boundary.(2) No precinct shall be wholly contained within the territorial boundaries of another precinct, except that a precinct which contains the entire geographical area of an incorporated place and in which the total number of registered voters at the last general election was less than three hundred may be so contained.(3) No precinct shall contain more than two thousand two hundred registered voters within its geographic boundaries. Within thirty days after the completion of each canvass, the registrar of voters of each parish shall notify the parish governing authority of every precinct in the parish which contains more than two thousand two hundred registered voters within its geographic boundaries. Within sixty days of such notification, the parish governing authority shall divide such precincts by a visible feature in accordance with R.S. 18:532.1.(4)(a) No precinct shall contain less than three hundred registered voters within its geographical boundaries, except:(i) When necessary to make it more convenient for voters in a geographically isolated and unincorporated area to vote. A voter in a geographically isolated and unincorporated area shall mean a voter whose residen

These data were developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau across all standard and custom geographies at statewide summary level where applicable. .
For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the ACS 2018-2022 Data Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics. Find naming convention prefixes/suffixes, geography definitions and user notes below.Prefixes:NoneCountpPercentrRatemMedianaMean (average)tAggregate (total)chChange in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pchPercent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chpChange in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)sSignificance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computedSuffixes:_e22Estimate from 2018-22 ACS_m22Margin of Error from 2018-22 ACS_e102006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2020 geography_m10Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2020 geography_e10_22Change, 2010-22 (holding constant at 2020 geography)GeographiesAAA = Area Agency on Aging (12 geographic units formed from counties providing statewide coverage)ARC21 = Atlanta Regional Commission modeling area (21 counties merged to a single geographic unit)ARWDB7 = Atlanta Regional Workforce Development Board (7 counties merged to a single geographic unit)BeltLineStatistical (buffer)BeltLineStatisticalSub (subareas)Census Tract (statewide)CFGA23 = Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta (23 counties merged to a single geographic unit)City (statewide)City of Atlanta Council Districts (City of Atlanta)City of Atlanta Neighborhood Planning Unit (City of Atlanta)City of Atlanta Neighborhood Statistical Areas (City of Atlanta)County (statewide)Georgia House (statewide)Georgia Senate (statewide)HSSA = High School Statistical Area (11 county region)MetroWater15 = Atlanta Metropolitan Water District (15 counties merged to a single geographic unit)Regional Commissions (statewide)State of Georgia (single geographic unit)Superdistrict (ARC region)US Congress (statewide)UWGA13 = United Way of Greater Atlanta (13 counties merged to a single geographic unit)ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (statewide)The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent. The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2018-2022). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available. For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2018-2022Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the data manifest: https://opendata.atlantaregional.com/documents/3b86ee614e614199ba66a3ff1ebfe3b5/about

US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 2014, 5-year estimates of the key demographic characteristics of Cities/Places geographic level in Orange County, California. The data contains 105 fields for the variable groups D01: Sex and age (universe: total population, table X1, 49 fields); D02: Median age by sex and race (universe: total population, table X1, 12 fields); D03: Race (universe: total population, table X2, 8 fields); D04: Race alone or in combination with one or more other races (universe: total population, table X2, 7 fields); D05: Hispanic or Latino and race (universe: total population, table X3, 21 fields), and; D06: Citizen voting age population (universe: citizen, 18 and over, table X5, 8 fields). The US Census geodemographic data are based on the 2014 TigerLines across multiple geographies. The spatial geographies were merged with ACS data tables. See full documentation at the OCACS project github page (https://github.com/ktalexan/OCACS-Geodemographics).

Since 1852, the U.S. presidential election has been contested in California 44 times, with Californians successfully voting for the winning candidate on 35 occasions, giving an overall success rate of 80 percent. California has awarded the majority of its electoral votes to the Republican Party in 23 elections, the Democratic Party in 20 elections, and the only year when a third-party candidate won a majority was in 1912, where Theodore Roosevelt won the state while campaigning as the Progressive Party's nominee. Between 1952 and 1988, there was only one election that was not won by the Republican candidate, while all elections since 1992 have been won by the Democratic nominee. In the 2024 election, Oakland-born Vice President Kamala Harris ran as the Democratic nominee, and comfortably won her home state but lost the nationwide vote. Californian under-representation? California was admitted to the union in 1850, and was granted just four electoral votes in its first three presidential elections. In the past two centuries, California's population has grown rapidly, largely due to a positive net migration rate from within the U.S. and abroad. Today, it has the highest population of any state in the U.S, with almost forty million people, and has therefore been designated 54 electoral votes; the most of any state. Although California has been allocated around ten percent of the total electoral votes on offer nationwide, The Golden State is home to roughly twelve percent of the total U.S. population, therefore a number closer to 62 electoral votes would be more proportional to the U.S. population distribution. Despite this, California's total allocation was reduced to 54 in the 2024 election. Native Californians As of 2020, Richard Nixon is the only native Californian to have been elected to the presidency, having won the election in 1968 and 1972. California also voted for Nixon in the 1960 election, although John F. Kennedy was the overall winner. Two other U.S. Presidents had declared California as their home state; they were Herbert Hoover, who won the 1928 election, and Ronald Reagan, who won in 1980 and 1984 respectively. While states generally support candidates who were born or reside there, Californian candidates have failed to carry their home state or state of birth in four U.S. presidential elections, these were; John C. Frémont in 1854 (who actually came third in California), Herbert Hoover in 1932, and Adlai Stevenson in both the 1952 and 1956 elections.

With Abraham Lincoln's victory in the 1860 presidential election, the Republican Party cemented its position as one of the two major political parties in the United States. Since 1860, candidates from both parties have faced one another in 41 elections, with the Republican candidate winning 24 elections, to the Democrats' 17. The share of electoral college votes is often very different from the share of the popular vote received by each candidate in the elections, as the popular vote differences tend to be much smaller. Electoral college system In the U.S., the electoral college system is used to elect the president. For most states, this means that the most popular candidate in each state then receives that state's allocation of electoral votes (which is determined by the state's population). In the majority of elections, the margin of electoral votes has been over thirty percent between the two major party candidates, and there were even some cases where the winner received over ninety percent more electoral votes than the runner-up. Biggest winners The largest margins for the Republican Party occurred in the aftermath of the American Civil War, in the pre-Depression era of the 1920s, with Eisenhower after the Second World War, and then again with the Nixon, Reagan, and Bush campaigns in the 1970s and 80s. For the Democratic Party, the largest victories occurred during the First and Second World Wars, and for Lindon B. Johnson and Bill Clinton in the second half of the 20th century. In the past six elections, the results of the electoral college vote have been relatively close, compared with the preceding hundred years; George W. Bush's victories were by less than seven percent, Obama's victories were larger (by around thirty percent), and in the most recent elections involving Donald Trump he both won and lost by roughly 14 percent.

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