USA 2020 Census Results Thread (Release: Today, 26 April)

[Zaybay]

Here's a tool to help visualize what these population figures mean on the congressional level:

https://www.redistrictingandyou.org/

[SInNYC]

Wisconsin’s data https://madison.com/wisconsin-change-in-total-population-by-county-from-2010-to-2020/html_2536aafe-90dc-5707-b2ac-8c6c75ce48e4.html

My initial thoughts are as follows:
-The rurals did ok. Marinette, Florence, Iron, Bayfield, Burnett, Polk, and Douglas were all supposed to lose population (none did-in fact, Bayfield and Burnett grew substantially). The areas that were supposed to lose the most, (Price, Rusk, Lincoln, and Langlade) lost much less than expected. Overall, rural numbers mean good things for the GOP, with the exception the Dems should be able to keep their Senate seat in Douglas/Ashland/Bayfield counties.

-Dane grew more than expected; 2020 estimate was 552,000, in reality it was 561,000. Too bad for Dems that it’s so blue already. One saving grace for them though is that LaCrosse, Eau Claire, Sauk, Green and Columbia all grew faster than predicted, and Richland, Crawford, Lafayette, and Buffalo all lost, meaning it would actually be easier to make WI-3 more blue.

-Brown, Calumet and Outagamie grew faster than expected, meaning WI-8 will need to shed some heavily R rural territory.

-WI-6, WI-7, and WI-5 can easily take on more red territory, WI-1 and WI-4 will swap some suburban territory.

Overall, it’s a wash, but the pubs should have a bonus state assembly seat because rurals were underestimated.

It kinda looked like the rurals in Wisconsin (and to a lesser extent Minnesota) did much better than what was seen elsewhere in the country.

Based on vosem/cinyc's maps, it looks to me like rurals east of the Missouri and north of the Ohio mostly beat expectations. Considering the Missouri kind of divides farms and ranches, I wonder if there is something about farmers and ranchers that lead to the large errors in estimates.

Southern rural areas, especially OK/TX/AR/LA and the Carolinas, did particularly bad relative to expectations.

[Cokeland Saxton]

Indiana’s top 20:
1. Indianapolis - 887,642
2. Fort Wayne - 263,886
3. Evansville - 117,298
4. South Bend - 103,453
5. Carmel - 99,757
6. Fishers - 98,977
7. Bloomington - 79,168
8. Hammond - 77,879
9. Lafayette - 70,783
10. Noblesville - 69,604
11. Gary - 69,093
12. Muncie - 65,194
13. Greenwood - 63,830
14. Kokomo - 59,604
15. Terre Haute - 58,389
16. Anderson - 54,788
17. Elkhart - 53,923
18. Mishawaka - 51,063
19. Columbus - 50,474
20. Jeffersonville - 49,447

[jimrtex]

Alright, here are some of the trends I noticed overall about this census:

2. Sun Belt ain't so hot:

This seems to be the story after every single census. For all the reports about huge growth in the sunbelt, it always seems to be overexaggerated. The estimates for areas such as San Antonio and Phoenix were noticeably bad, but in general most urban, suburban, and rural areas down south underperformed.

Bexar had been estimated to grow at 17.9% over the decade, and the Census only shows 17.1%.

That is not noticeably bad.

I thought it was pretty clear, since I used the city names of Phoenix and San Antonio instead of Maricopa and Bexar, that I was referring to the city of San Antonio, and not to Bexar county.

Here are the stats for anyone curious.

San Antonio projected growth: 16.6%
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/tables.2019.html

San Antonio actual growth: 8.1%
https://www.kens5.com/article/news/local/census-breakdown-us-texas-satx-2020/273-ff46cb3a-3d7a-4430-8453-75235cc667d7

Personally, I'd say that seeing only half of the growth projected is noticeably bad, but to each their own.

San Antonio is dominant in Bexar County, with around 77% of the population, a share that according to estimates was maintained through the decade.

I had downloaded the Texas county results so used those.

If we believe the Census results then about 120,000 people disappeared from San Antonio, but 110,000 ended up in Bexar County outside the city.

There may be an error in how population estimates are distributed (city estimates are derived from county estimates adjusted for housing unit changes).

https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/methodology/2010-2020/2020-subco-meth_final.pdf

Or conceivably differences in how residence location are determined were a problem.

In any event I sent a note to the mayor of San Antonio suggesting looking deeper.

There is conceivably a similar situation in Phoenix. How close was the estimate for Maricopa? And what about the other cities in the county?

What evidence is there that urban, suburban, and rural areas underperformed enough to make any sort of generalization.

Of the largest counties in Texas > 50,000, 31 surpassed the estimate, 36 fell short and one (Gregg) was almost perfect.

[jimrtex]

Fun fact - Yakutat borough AK has the exact same population it did in 2010: 662.

10 years older?

[cinyc]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

[jimrtex]

Eagle Ford bust.

Relative to 2020 estimate:

Zavala -18.1%
McMullen -17.7%
Dimmitt -13.7%
Duval -11.4%
La Salle -11.3%
Frio -9.7%
Uvalde -8.2%
Jim Hogg -6.5%
Atascosa -5.2%
Jim Wells -4.0%
Webb -3.8%
Nueces -2.8%

The estimate methodology may overestimate "residence" or perhaps missed people moving out. Data used for migration includes IRS returns which lag.

There is not a lot of housing in the area, so people are commuting long distances or living in hotels or RVs or mobile homes or man camps. While multiple wells are drilled from a single pad there is still a lot of moving around to different job sites.

[jimrtex]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

Have you done a comparison of 2020 estimate to 2020 Census?

Notable in your county map is how far the shadow of DFW, Houston, San Antonio, Austin extends outward. This is either exurbs or people retiring in the country.

[cinyc]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

Have you done a comparison of 2020 estimate to 2020 Census?

Yes. Click Menu-->vs Apr 20 Estimate (linear backdated July Estimate) or vs July 20 Estimate on the interactive. The County Sub version includes fewer geos because county subs outside the Northeast and Midwest are generally not included in the PEP estimates dataset.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

Have you done a comparison of 2020 estimate to 2020 Census?

Yes. Click Menu-->vs Apr 20 Estimate (linear backdated July Estimate) or vs July 20 Estimate on the interactive. The County Sub version includes fewer geos because county subs outside the Northeast and Midwest are generally not included in the PEP estimates dataset.

see also: Metro Atlanta

[Nyvin]

This is kinda wild -

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1426193763714707456

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

[Vosem]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Good thing* that Shrinking America is growing at Growing America's expense...

The real question here is whether these shifts are causal (which I actually suspect; Democrats are the status quo party and Republicans are the party calling for revolutionary change) or whether there might be some background factor causing both size change and political preferences. Thus, would a growing area that starts to shrink switch from D to R? (I think it does, which is a pretty apocalyptic fact for Ds as they currently exist).

*Purely from a political standpoint.

[Brittain33]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

[Roronoa D. Law]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Good thing* that Shrinking America is growing at Growing America's expense...

The real question here is whether these shifts are causal (which I actually suspect; Democrats are the status quo party and Republicans are the party calling for revolutionary change) or whether there might be some background factor causing both size change and political preferences. Thus, would a growing area that starts to shrink switch from D to R? (I think it does, which is a pretty apocalyptic fact for Ds as they currently exist).

*Purely from a political standpoint.

But there aren't many places like Scranton and Cleveland left for Republicans to go to. Denver and Houston both slowed down toward the end of the decade but nobody believes that Republicans are going to come back winning Colorado or Harris county anytime soon. Meanwhile, if Democrats can breakthrough in some of these midsize metros like Charleston, Anchorage, and SLC. I think that will death nail in Republican's attempts at relying on institutional advantage.

[Bootes Void]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

I still think that the fastest growing counties today, atleast well over a majority are still republicans but have trended to the Dems. I would have to guess a similar story could have been argued for 2004 as well

[Roronoa D. Law]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

I still think that the fastest growing counties today, atleast well over a majority are still republicans but have trended to the Dems. I would have to guess a similar story could have been argued for 2004 as well

I forgot who said but some on this board said that it generally takes about 10 years for the demographics to show up in the electorate. For example, Georgia back in 2010 was 61% white but we didn't get a white electorate around 61% till like last year.

[Vosem]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Good thing* that Shrinking America is growing at Growing America's expense...

The real question here is whether these shifts are causal (which I actually suspect; Democrats are the status quo party and Republicans are the party calling for revolutionary change) or whether there might be some background factor causing both size change and political preferences. Thus, would a growing area that starts to shrink switch from D to R? (I think it does, which is a pretty apocalyptic fact for Ds as they currently exist).

*Purely from a political standpoint.

But there aren't many places like Scranton and Cleveland left for Republicans to go to. Denver and Houston both slowed down toward the end of the decade but nobody believes that Republicans are going to come back winning Colorado or Harris county anytime soon. Meanwhile, if Democrats can breakthrough in some of these midsize metros like Charleston, Anchorage, and SLC. I think that will death nail in Republican's attempts at relying on institutional advantage.

Sure there are. 52% of counties shrunk between 2010-2020, of which an overwhelming majority probably trended R. That means they can still go to 48% of counties, most of which are going to be much more populated than the 52% beforehand. In the year 2020 something like half of all states had more deaths than births: the current Democratic Party is not sustainable, especially given the fall-off of immigration post-COVID.

(Also, like, while I think the Denver area is still growing strongly, Harris county is a great example of an area where the GOP actually performed much better than expected in 2020 -- it literally trended right!)

Institutional advantage in the Electoral College has to do with winning shrinking areas, so the GOP is going to have that until Democrats start winning there. Institutional advantage in the Senate is just how the median state votes, and that's incredibly consistently right of the United States. The first figure is year, then the two states between which the median is located (since there's an even number of states), then the figure, then a comparison to the national popular vote:

2020 (GA/NC): Trump+0.56 (R+5.02)
2016 (AZ/NC): Trump+3.58 (R+5.67)
2012 (FL/OH): Obama+1.93 (R+1.93)
2008 (FL/OH): Obama+3.70 (R+3.56)
2004 (FL/MO): Bush+6.11 (R+3.64)
2000 (NV/TN): Bush+3.71 (R+4.22)

The advantage is quite persistent and long-lasting -- note that the median Senate seat voted harder for Bush '00, the narrowest victory ever, than it did for the Obama '08 landslide. Also, the current median Senator represents a constituency which voted Trump 2020.

[Bootes Void]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

I still think that the fastest growing counties today, atleast well over a majority are still republicans but have trended to the Dems. I would have to guess a similar story could have been argued for 2004 as well

I forgot who said but some on this board said that it generally takes about 10 years for the demographics to show up in the electorate. For example, Georgia back in 2010 was 61% white but we didn't get a white electorate around 61% till like last year.

It was actually 55% "non Hispanic white" back in 2010 not 61%, this census they changed up the methodologies on how race is calculated so  the results may look stranger than they actually are.

[Roronoa D. Law]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

I still think that the fastest growing counties today, atleast well over a majority are still republicans but have trended to the Dems. I would have to guess a similar story could have been argued for 2004 as well

I forgot who said but some on this board said that it generally takes about 10 years for the demographics to show up in the electorate. For example, Georgia back in 2010 was 61% white but we didn't get a white electorate around 61% till like last year.

It was actually 55% "non Hispanic white" back in 2010 not 61%, this census they changed up the methodologies on how race is calculated so  the results may look stranger than they actually are.

My bad I was looking at combined. Still shows that it takes some time for the demographics to show up in electorate.

[Skill and Chance]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Good thing* that Shrinking America is growing at Growing America's expense...

The real question here is whether these shifts are causal (which I actually suspect; Democrats are the status quo party and Republicans are the party calling for revolutionary change) or whether there might be some background factor causing both size change and political preferences. Thus, would a growing area that starts to shrink switch from D to R? (I think it does, which is a pretty apocalyptic fact for Ds as they currently exist).

*Purely from a political standpoint.

But there aren't many places like Scranton and Cleveland left for Republicans to go to. Denver and Houston both slowed down toward the end of the decade but nobody believes that Republicans are going to come back winning Colorado or Harris county anytime soon. Meanwhile, if Democrats can breakthrough in some of these midsize metros like Charleston, Anchorage, and SLC. I think that will death nail in Republican's attempts at relying on institutional advantage.

Sure there are. 52% of counties shrunk between 2010-2020, of which an overwhelming majority probably trended R. That means they can still go to 48% of counties, most of which are going to be much more populated than the 52% beforehand. In the year 2020 something like half of all states had more deaths than births: the current Democratic Party is not sustainable, especially given the fall-off of immigration post-COVID.

(Also, like, while I think the Denver area is still growing strongly, Harris county is a great example of an area where the GOP actually performed much better than expected in 2020 -- it literally trended right!)

Institutional advantage in the Electoral College has to do with winning shrinking areas, so the GOP is going to have that until Democrats start winning there. Institutional advantage in the Senate is just how the median state votes, and that's incredibly consistently right of the United States. The first figure is year, then the two states between which the median is located (since there's an even number of states), then the figure, then a comparison to the national popular vote:

2020 (GA/NC): Trump+0.56 (R+5.02)
2016 (AZ/NC): Trump+3.58 (R+5.67)
2012 (FL/OH): Obama+1.93 (R+1.93)
2008 (FL/OH): Obama+3.70 (R+3.56)
2004 (FL/MO): Bush+6.11 (R+3.64)
2000 (NV/TN): Bush+3.71 (R+4.22)

The advantage is quite persistent and long-lasting -- note that the median Senate seat voted harder for Bush '00, the narrowest victory ever, than it did for the Obama '08 landslide. Also, the current median Senator represents a constituency which voted Trump 2020.

While the bolded is somewhat true in election years ending in 0 or 8, it isn't the most important source of EC advantage.  The important part of EC advantage is winning large and medium-large states narrowly vs. in blowouts.  The obvious example is Florida vs. New York and California, and the closing margin in Texas during the Trump years vs. the Romney/McCain blowouts there when Obama had the EC advantage.  As things currently stand, the 2 most likely ways for the EC advantage to flip are 1. Texas continues trending until it is voting narrowly Dem in competitive elections (but it also needs to stop before it turns into 60%+ Dem!) or 2. the pro-GOP Hispanic trend takes off to the point where Florida is 55R/45D, while California and New York are only 55D/45R.

[Adam Griffin]

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1425877136997502988?s=20

Honestly, I'm not buying it - unless there's some really good evidence to suggest that even post-AVR like 75% of non-voters in the state are non-white.

CVAP would be like 56% white, which makes sense with election results.

The 50.1 number still seems like a stretch. Just pulled the SoS registration stats by race: 52.67% of RVs are explicitly non-Hispanic white - with an additional 10.82% classified as "other/unknown". In Georgia, there has been a long trend of many people being captured as "other/unknown" due to a lack of racial responses, and most are in fact part of one of the major racial/ethnic categories.

It's generally safe to proportion these among the other known groups, which in this case would leave us with a 58.36% non-Hispanic white electorate of 7,395,375. That's 69% of the Census population equivalent of 10,711,908.

To get to 50.1% non-Hispanic white, the remaining 31% of the population (the vast majority of whom are children, along with some non-citizens and felons) would have to be 32% non-Hispanic white. If the number was, say, 38%, then I'd buy it. This feels like a big overestimate of non-white people, however.

[jimrtex]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

Have you done a comparison of 2020 estimate to 2020 Census?

Yes. Click Menu-->vs Apr 20 Estimate (linear backdated July Estimate) or vs July 20 Estimate on the interactive. The County Sub version includes fewer geos because county subs outside the Northeast and Midwest are generally not included in the PEP estimates dataset.

The Census Estimates have both an April 1, 2020 and July 1, 2020 estimates (but maybe they simply interpolated and you knew that?).

Interesting they were way off for places like Cape Cod and the Islands. That suggests they were picking up people at their summer homes. The same thing is true in northern Wisconsin and the Adirondacks (Hamilton). Back in '020, these areas were notable for their low response rate which was based on responses per housing unit. If nobody was there in April, no one would respond. Someone from middle class Milwaukee might not be able to fully retire, but could run an ice cream stand up North, and stay through hunting season and the Holidays, and then head South for the winter.

The worst underperformers in Arizona were Pinal and La Paz, which likely have a larger share of winter visitors. There are actually people who live in Phoenix year round, as unlikely as that seems when it is 110F.

A couple of fun examples. Concho County, Texas.

2010	4101
2011	4121
2012	4082
2013	4118
2014	4080
2015	4065
2016	4134
2017	2701
2018	2679
2019	2749
2020	2827

There was (is) a private prison in Eden which had a federal contract that was not renewed at the end of the contract. The 2017 estimate reflects the closure. But the Census shows a population 3303.

Terrell County

2010	1007
2011	945
2012	917
2013	887
2014	906
2015	863
2016	815
2017	810
2018	792
2019	752
2020	702

It used to be the case that days of work for railwaymen was measured in miles rather than hours. Southern Pacific crews would work until Sanderson, when a new crew would get on and continue. The first crew would overnight in Sanderson and then work the return train the next day. As this practice has ended Sanderson has been dwindling away. In addition, transcontinental road traffic uses I-10, and few still use US 90.

The Census population was 760. It turns out the county had only lost 1/4 of its population, rather than 1/3.

[Annatar]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

The fastest growing counties are always Republican since the fastest growing counties are all exurban which tend to vote heavily Republican on average.

In 2012, Romney won 85/100 of the fastest growing counties, Trump carried 93/100.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/24/85-of-the-100-fastest-growing-counties-voted-for-mitt-romney-in-2012/


https://www.lifezette.com/2017/03/93-of-americas-100-fastest-growing-counties-went-trump/

[Roll Roons]

"Shrinking America" is almost exclusively trending right

"Growing America" is overwhelmingly trending left.

Flashback to 2004 when something like 97 of the country’s 100 fastest-growing counties voted for George W. Bush, and 1 of the 3 was Clark County, Nev. What does it say that things have changed so dramatically?

The fastest growing counties are always Republican since the fastest growing counties are all exurban which tend to vote heavily Republican on average.

In 2012, Romney won 85/100 of the fastest growing counties, Trump carried 93/100.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/24/85-of-the-100-fastest-growing-counties-voted-for-mitt-romney-in-2012/


https://www.lifezette.com/2017/03/93-of-americas-100-fastest-growing-counties-went-trump/

Though my guess is that at least a few were Trump-Biden counties. Hays and Williamson in Texas come to mind.

[Adam Griffin]

Made a simple two-color population growth/loss map (shading at times isn't fun):

Image Link