2016 White and Non-White Vote by County Project

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

So, I've finished version 2.0 that breaks things down by race.

One issue I've ran into is that since I don't always have county level information for Asian and Hispanic groups, I just apply a statewide weight (i.e. a boost for Trump if there are more Vietnamese in a state, a detraction if there are more Hmong, as an example). for the remaining counties. This sometimes leads to "choppy" borders (where you can tell the boundary of a state). Accordingly, there might need to be some revision at work, though it might also be justified for some states.

Here are all the maps I've made for this project. I apologize for the current colors (I post these maps on the other websites I'm on, where everyone else is accustomed to a Red=Republican scheme). I'll change them to Atlas Colors once I finalize this.

Any suggestions would be appreciated!


(Trump's national share was 56.9% among Whites, 5.0% among Blacks, 23% among Hispanics, 23.5% among Asians, and 32% among Other)

The Asian and Other results were interesting.

I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary received a lower percentage of the white vote than any other major party nominee since McGovern.  Not sure about 1984, but even Mondale probably got more of the Southern white vote than Hillary.

Portland, San Fran and DC have largest percentage of white liberals. Interesting.

Seattle belongs on that list as a city.  (It just doesn't show because more people in King County live outside the city than in it.  Portland contains most Multnomah County residents, San Francisco is a county itself, and DC is like a county for these purposes).

Interesting how both Snohomish County (Everett) and Thurston County (Olympia) whites leaned Hillary but Pierce County (Tacoma) whites leaned towards Trump.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

Once you get to 20 posts your links will be active. If you'd like to have me split the posts out into their own thread, let me know. In the meantime, here's the map from reagente:

Beautiful. Crazy to think that Iowa was a democrat stronghold and Missouri was the quintessential swing state not that long ago. Is there a map of swing in the white vote relative to 2012?

[Tartarus Sauce]

So I've been going back through this data and have noticed some trends that I didn't expect. Some examples:

Reno-Sparks metro Whites (41.7%) voted for Clinton more than Las Vegas metro Whites (39.1%). Genuinely no clue why this is.

Whites in Knox County (Knoxville) (29.7%) and Hamilton County (Chattanooga) (27.4%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Shelby County (Memphis) (26.7%). It's not by much in Chattanooga, but Knoxville Whites voted a full three percentage points more for Clinton than Whites in Memphis and its suburbs. I suppose the racial tensions in Memphis have something to do with the discrepancy.  

Whites in Hamilton County, OH (40.6%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Montgomery County, OH (36.8%). Perhaps not all that surprising, but probably the first time Cincinnati Whites voted to the left of Dayton Whites.

Whites in Sarasota County, FL (39.2%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Hillsborough County (37.8%). White's aren't exactly a liberal bunch along the Western coast of Florida, but I'm surprised that any county along the retiree-laden southwest coast managed to have its White population vote to the left of the Whites in the county where the Tampa Bay metro anchor is located, if for no other reason than out of consideration to the general rule of thumb that Whites in larger metros are more Democratic than Whites in nearby smaller metros unless there's a really obvious reason to the contrary (college towns, ski resorts, bohemian lifestyle communities, etc.).

Whites in Kent County, MI (38.6%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Macomb County (36.1%). Western Michigan is the historic stronghold of the GOP in Michigan, but Clinton took such a beating with the middle-class Whites in the Detroit metro area that Macomb County Whites actually voted more in favor of Trump than Whites in the Grand Rapids area which is slowly trending Democratic.

Whites in Fairfield County, CT (50.6%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in New Haven County (45.8%). That's actually not that surprising, considering the upper class shift towards the Democrats nationwide compared to historical trends. What is surprising though is that Clinton did better with Whites in Tolland County (47.8%), New London County (46.6%), and Middlesex County (48.5%) than with Whites in New Haven County, despite the fact that they experienced the same White middle-class shift to Trump that New Haven County did, but are much more sparsely populated than New Haven County. Rural/small-town working/middle-class Whites generally shifted more in favor of Trump than those that came from larger urban areas, but of the aforementioned counties, the largest shift came from a county with 850,000 people in it and one of the state's largest metros.

Whites in St. Charles County, MO (30.9%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Jefferson County (28.6%). Hard to believe there was a time that Jefferson County would vote for a Black Democrat for President. What's not surprising is that Jefferson County has gone from a competitive swing county to safe Republican. What is surprising is that they managed to so rapidly outpace the conservative bona fides of St Charles County, which has long been a Republican fortress and didn't even trend Democrat in 2016.

Whites in Harvey County, KS (31.3%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Sedgwick County (27.7%). This one is particularly confusing because although Wichita isn't exactly known as a Democratic bastion, larger cities surrounded by deeply Republican rural areas will lean more Democratic than their environs by default. Newton isn't known for being a liberal small Kansas town, or to have much of anything that distinguishes it from other small Kansas towns as far as I'm aware, yet the Whites here voted around 3.5% more for Clinton than Whites in the much larger Wichita just to the south.

Whites in McLean County, IL (40.6%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Peoria County (39.5%). Worth noting that Clinton actually narrowly lost McLean County but won Peoria County, an obvious testament to the difference minority voters make. McLean County, despite being narrowly carried by Obama in 2008, more thoroughly resisted the Democratic trend much of the rest of non-Chicago north Illinois and mid-Illinois underwent in the post-Reagan years, after nearly a century and a half of being one of the most loyal Republican regions in the country. Now with much of downstate working and middle-class Whites reverting back to their Republican affiliation, McLean County could be poised to finally give in and start voting Democratic for the near future. Trump's crash in Bloomington-Normal compared to Romney is almost certainly due to the large academia presence centered around Illinois State, and Republicans will likely continue to perform poorly here nationally as long as the party is running on a Trumpist platfrom.

Whites in both Collin County (28.5%) and Denton County (26.8%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Tarrant County (25.1%). Dallas has always been known as being more liberal than Fort Worth, but the fact that Whites in Collin and Denton both voted for Clinton at a higher rate than Tarrant did is much more shocking. Fort Worth is, after all, the second largest city in the metroplex, and Collin and Denton are even more sprawly and less developed than Tarrant and Dallas and with smaller anchors. Yet Tarrant County was the least Democratic of the four. I would have assumed that whatever drove Tarrant's political profile would have been amplified the further out you went from the central Dallas-Fort Worth corridor, but apparently it actually becomes ever so slightly less conservative to the north.

[Sol]

Whites in Knox County (Knoxville) (29.7%) and Hamilton County (Chattanooga) (27.4%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Shelby County (Memphis) (26.7%). It's not by much in Chattanooga, but Knoxville Whites voted a full three percentage points more for Clinton than Whites in Memphis and its suburbs. I suppose the racial tensions in Memphis have something to do with the discrepancy.  

UT-Knoxville, which is the flagship, is located there. Knoxville, as far as I know, isn't much of a college town culturally in the vein of Austin or Madison, but it's probably enough to make up a good bit of that difference.

Whites in Sarasota County, FL (39.2%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Hillsborough County (37.8%). White's aren't exactly a liberal bunch along the Western coast of Florida, but I'm surprised that any county along the retiree-laden southwest coast managed to have its White population vote to the left of the Whites in the county where the Tampa Bay metro anchor is located, if for no other reason than out of consideration to the general rule of thumb that Whites in larger metros are more Democratic than Whites in nearby smaller metros unless there's a really obvious reason to the contrary (college towns, ski resorts, bohemian lifestyle communities, etc.).

I've been to Sarasota before. The impression I got was that there's a certain moneyed "bohemian" culture to some of the city which presumably increases the white vote Clinton vote somewhat. There's also a small liberal arts college, The New College of Florida, by the county line in Manatee, which probably has a slight effect.

There's also a non-negligible Amish population if that makes any difference, though it probably doesn't.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Whites in Knox County (Knoxville) (29.7%) and Hamilton County (Chattanooga) (27.4%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Shelby County (Memphis) (26.7%). It's not by much in Chattanooga, but Knoxville Whites voted a full three percentage points more for Clinton than Whites in Memphis and its suburbs. I suppose the racial tensions in Memphis have something to do with the discrepancy.  

UT-Knoxville, which is the flagship, is located there. Knoxville, as far as I know, isn't much of a college town culturally in the vein of Austin or Madison, but it's probably enough to make up a good bit of that difference.

Whites in Sarasota County, FL (39.2%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in Hillsborough County (37.8%). White's aren't exactly a liberal bunch along the Western coast of Florida, but I'm surprised that any county along the retiree-laden southwest coast managed to have its White population vote to the left of the Whites in the county where the Tampa Bay metro anchor is located, if for no other reason than out of consideration to the general rule of thumb that Whites in larger metros are more Democratic than Whites in nearby smaller metros unless there's a really obvious reason to the contrary (college towns, ski resorts, bohemian lifestyle communities, etc.).

I've been to Sarasota before. The impression I got was that there's a certain moneyed "bohemian" culture to some of the city which presumably increases the white vote Clinton vote somewhat. There's also a small liberal arts college, The New College of Florida, by the county line in Manatee, which probably has a slight effect.

There's also a non-negligible Amish population if that makes any difference, though it probably doesn't.

That school is neck-and-neck with Oberlin for the most liberal (culturally) school in the country, so it might matter more than the average small college.

[Joe McCarthy Was Right]

Since I know there was a similar map made for the 2012 election, is there any chance we could get a swing map between the two? I imagine it would track pretty much with affluent and educated communities generally swinging to Clinton and poorer and less-educated communities swinging to Trump, but I'd be curious to know if there are any exceptions.

It's doable in a sense, but as reagente pointed out, we used different ways of generating our maps. Because 2012 was simple enough in terms of a two-way model, I just focused on calculating Obama's share of the white vote directly (due to the fact that in most places, Romney's share would be ([Obama's share] - 1pt). 2016 was more complex and the way reagente did his makes more sense. We also presumably used different data-sets/combinations of data to make our maps.

Nevertheless, I could pretty easily generate a map that shows the difference between Obama and Clinton's shares of the white vote. It should be pretty accurate in the vast majority of cases, but as I've already noticed, we were in disagreement in some select counties based on the margin difference in them.

So this is the closest thing we can get to that: a simple comparison of the white vote share for Obama and Clinton between the two models. Here's the interactive map. Several of the areas that seem out-of-place I know are the result of the models' differences (for instance, my model is probably the one that is off in Clayton, GA & Imperial, CA).

Red counties/negative numbers indicate Clinton improved over Obama among whites; blue counties/positive numbers indicate Clinton did more poorly than Obama among whites. Numbers are shown as percentage point differences (i.e. Obama got 46% of whites and Clinton got 32% = "14").

I don't believe the white vote swung that heavily towards Trump in Philadelphia or Prince George's County MD. Otherwise the black vote would have almost had to swing towards Clinton there, which doesn't sound very likely to me.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Could we potentially get a reupload of this data? Screw Google for shafting Fusion Tables.

[RINO Tom]

Trump cratering in Bloomington would have some to do with academia/ISU, but I think it has more to do with the general "white collar" shift toward Clinton, as B-N has a stereotype of being a very white collar area that is dominated by State Farm employees.

[Adam Griffin]

I'm archiving all of my FT data as we speak and will download it once it's ready. Admittedly, it may take some time to sort through given I had hundreds of FT data sets and I wasn't very good at organizing them.

With regard to the 2016 white vote numbers specifically, I believe reagente uploaded his data to his own FT account (however, I hosted the page on which it was displayed), so he will need to double-check to make sure this data is secured. FT data will remain downloadable until March 3.

[Idaho Conservative]

https://www.deviantart.com/reagentah/art/2016-Non-Hispanic-White-Vote-Map-by-C-District-770102062
by CD

[SaneDemocrat]

I'm archiving all of my FT data as we speak and will download it once it's ready. Admittedly, it may take some time to sort through given I had hundreds of FT data sets and I wasn't very good at organizing them.

With regard to the 2016 white vote numbers specifically, I believe reagente uploaded his data to his own FT account (however, I hosted the page on which it was displayed), so he will need to double-check to make sure this data is secured. FT data will remain downloadable until March 3.

This good to know

[Idaho Conservative]

There's a big disparity between the exit polls and these maps, AZ for example.

[Non Swing Voter]

Trump cratering in Bloomington would have some to do with academia/ISU, but I think it has more to do with the general "white collar" shift toward Clinton, as B-N has a stereotype of being a very white collar area that is dominated by State Farm employees.

But Republicans do so well with white college educated voters I heard from a very wise person here with lots of life experience.

[Non Swing Voter]

Whites in Fairfield County, CT (50.6%) voted more in favor of Clinton than Whites in New Haven County (45.8%). That's actually not that surprising, considering the upper class shift towards the Democrats nationwide compared to historical trends. What is surprising though is that Clinton did better with Whites in Tolland County (47.8%), New London County (46.6%), and Middlesex County (48.5%) than with Whites in New Haven County, despite the fact that they experienced the same White middle-class shift to Trump that New Haven County did, but are much more sparsely populated than New Haven County. Rural/small-town working/middle-class Whites generally shifted more in favor of Trump than those that came from larger urban areas, but of the aforementioned counties, the largest shift came from a county with 850,000 people in it and one of the state's largest metros.

That's actually not all that surprising about New Haven county...  Outside of the Yalie types in New Haven the white people in that county are very blue collar, socially more like southerners.  Especially areas like Milford and Orange.  Those other counties, while rural, have a lot of wealthy, scenic, and historic towns that attract more culturally liberal whites.  Also, while some of the counties are sparsely populated/rural, it's still CT, which is a fairly urban state so most towns are generally within the vicinity of Hartford, New Haven, Boston, NYC.

[nclib]

Just listing Trump's best states among each minority group...

black trump
[NE-3]   11.7
WY   9.7
WV   9.2
ND   8.7
OK   8.5
ID   8.3

Not surprising - very Republican states with low black population (ironically blacks in very conservative states with many blacks (MS, AL) are more or as Democratic than the national average)

hisp trump   
WV   39.5
WY   39
[NE-3]   37.3
KY   36.8
FL   36.2
ND   35.3

Not surprising - FL is Cubans, and KY is a bit of an outlier.

asian trump
[NE-3]   47.3
WV   39.9
OK   39.6
ND   39.4
ID   39.3
LA   38.2

LA a bit of an outlier as I thought Asians in LA are primarily in New Orleans area.

other trump   
OK   56.9
WV   49.1
[NE-3]   46.4
KY   45.5
AR   44.7
TN   44.4

Likely Native Americans and mixed race. OK is expected as it has many assimilated Native Americans. Probably a coincidence that these are almost all the states that swung Repub in 2008.

[Badger]

Just listing Trump's best states among each minority group...

black trump
[NE-3]   11.7
WY   9.7
WV   9.2
ND   8.7
OK   8.5
ID   8.3

Not surprising - very Republican states with low black population (ironically blacks in very conservative states with many blacks (MS, AL) are more or as Democratic than the national average)

hisp trump   
WV   39.5
WY   39
[NE-3]   37.3
KY   36.8
FL   36.2
ND   35.3

Not surprising - FL is Cubans, and KY is a bit of an outlier.

asian trump
[NE-3]   47.3
WV   39.9
OK   39.6
ND   39.4
ID   39.3
LA   38.2

LA a bit of an outlier as I thought Asians in LA are primarily in New Orleans area.

other trump   
OK   56.9
WV   49.1
[NE-3]   46.4
KY   45.5
AR   44.7
TN   44.4

Likely Native Americans and mixed race. OK is expected as it has many assimilated Native Americans. Probably a coincidence that these are almost all the states that swung Repub in 2008.

I suspect some of these like Nebraska's Third District are related to small sample size errors. Actually, because most of these states are Republican strongholds without large and strong Hispanic or Asian or other communities of color, it makes sense that there's going to be a disproportionate share of third and fourth generation assimilated Hispanics and Asian who are your typical Republican small business members, who are Republican for much the same reason as their white Neighbors, albeit with some having somewhat more concerns over Trump's position on immigration

 I can explain to you exactly what the issue about Louisiana Asians are. There are actually good number of Vietnamese fishing boat operators and Crews in Louisiana. Most of them are of the older Vietnamese generation that's still bitter over the Communists winning the war, not to mention typical small business owners whom, even after the BP oil well blowout, are as concerned about government regulations as they are the oil industry effing up their fishing Waters again. Plus many of them are staunch Catholics as well. This of course counterbalances be more democratic Asian population in New Orleans, but that explains why Trump support is relatively strong among Asians Statewide.

[Sol]

There are a few Asian majority (mostly Vietnamese) precincts in Eastern NOLA and they voted for McCain; though it looks like it flipped to Clinton.

[Calthrina950]

It's so unfortunate that these county maps are gone. Hopefully, they will be reuploaded again.

[SaneDemocrat]

We need to find a fusiontables alternative

[Calthrina950]

We need to find a fusiontables alternative

This page contains a list of Fusion Tables alternatives: https://www.safe.com/blog/2018/12/7-google-fusion-tables-alternatives/. Perhaps one of these can be used.

[SaneDemocrat]

Has anyone had any luck for the fusiontable alternatives

[Calthrina950]

Has anyone had any luck for the fusiontable alternatives

Unfortunately not. This is probably dead.

[SaneDemocrat]

That sucks. Open Street map

[Calthrina950]

That sucks. Open Street map

Over a year later, and no further progress was made. As I've said, I doubt this will be recreated again, because Reagente has moved on to other projects.

[7,052,770]

There is an R package that makes shaded county maps like this. I was able to figure it out as an R novice. All I needed was an Excel table with the numbers and a formula.that calculated the shading color in hex code.