National Tract Project

[ProgressiveModerate]

Now that redistricting is done, this will be my next majour project.

Here I hope the graph the 2020 Presidential results by tract to the best of my abilities.

The reason for doing this is because there really isn't a clean detailed map of the 2020 elections and precincts are flawed, as in most states they tend to be "biased" towards rural communities or urban minorities, and are often just extremely messy.

I also hope this helps me to get a better understanding of the country politically.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/9f54665f-dc24-4a53-a377-392acba61249

here's a link

[ProgressiveModerate]

Wyoming is the first state to be completed!

Wyoming is obviously an extremely Republican state; it gave Trump the largest margin of victory twice and is widely considered by many to be the most Republican state in the nation.

It has been solidly Republican for a while even as internal coalitions have changed. Nowadays, Republicans obviously get insane margins out of rural comunities but also tend to do well in mid-sized communities throughout the state such as Gillette and Casper. Even Cheyenne is a Republican stronghold with only a few downtown tracts narrowly voting for Biden.

The only 2 real sources of Democratic votes are Jackson and Laramie. Jackson is basically a wealthy ski resort community that has swung hard left and Laramie has University of Wyoming.

One thing that surprises me a bit is that Democrats are hitting 20 or 25% in some of these rural communities even though on paper they should be like Trump +70 too. This likely has to do with the presense, however small, of vacation communities and tourism.

The only remotely possible path for Democrats to become a viable party in the state barring dramatic re-alignment would making inroads in some of these mid-sized communities and hope for insane growth in Jackson and Laramie. They'd likely need to win Cheyenne outright too. Given how low population Wyoming is and the growing influence of Denver, this may not be as impossible as some think but is still very unlikely and would take a few decades.,

For the foreseeable though, Wyoming will almost certainly continue to be a reliable Republican state at all levels and any chance of the state becomign competative long term will be because of re-alignment or dramatic growth that changes the state significantly.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The next state is Alaska!

Alaska is a very unique state geographically and politically being separate from the other 48 (and Hawaii). Democrat's "majority caucus" currently controls the state House interestingly enough. The state has been reliably red on the federal level for a while (despite having some competitive House and Senate races and a Dem Senator until 2014). However, in 2020, Trump "only" won Alaska by 10 points allowing some Dems to see an opening down the road.


Alaska is unique in that Democrats tend to do very well in rural areas due to Native American voters. However, these rural areas in Alaska are low turnout and are overall a very small share of both the electorate and population. Strong Republican margins in "exurbs" such as North Pole just outside Fairbanks or Washilla, north of Anchorage is what gives the state it's Republican tilt. These areas vote Republican in large part because of the energy industry.

Going forwards, a roadmap to Democrats becoming competative statewide would likely involve winning Anchorage solidly, as it has become swingy lately, and working on engaging Native communities.

[ProgressiveModerate]

North Dakota!

Like Wyoming, North Dakota is another deep red box in the center of the Country. The state is almost entirely white and has a relatively low population. While Democrats have had success in ND downballot races until pretty recently, polarization has made it reliably Republican at all levels.

Republicans absolutely dominate in the Western half of the state, both in rural and urban communities. Even Bismarck, the capital, is deep red which is quite unusual. The only blue areas in this region are a few low population Native American tracts.

On the Western half, Republicans still dominate but not to the same degree they do in the east. In all honesty, Democrat's performance in this region is respectable given the Demographics but they're losing ground rapidly. The only real moderately Dem community is downtown Fargo.

Like Wyoming, North Dakota is extremely likely to stay a reliable Republican state barring dramatic re-alignment. Theoretically if Fargo were to become a tech hub and start booming in population, it could become closer, but that would take many decades and Fargo has the same chance as really any other minor city in the US. Furthermore, the heavily Republican eastern portion has seen good growth in many areas so that would offset any Dem gains in Fargo anyways.

Overall, I like this map style because even in a state like ND which is just seen as deep red throughout, one can see the political differences between the East and Western halves of the state.

[ProgressiveModerate]

South Dakota is very simillar to North Dakota in so many ways, including in how people are distributed geographically and politically.

Simillar to North Dakota, Republicans win the Western part of the state by absolutely insane margins throughout including Rapid City, whereas their wins in the Eastern half of the state are still notable but slightly less impressive.

The main reasons why South Dakota is slightly closer than North Dakota is because there is a slightly higher Native population and Rapid City isn't as deep red as Bismark. However, it's still very unlikely the state will be competative anytime sson barring re-alignment just purely because rural areas provide the GOP with such a high floor and Native communities are generally shrinking

[ProgressiveModerate]

Hawaii!

This is the first deep blue state I've plotted. Similar to Alaska, the state is very unique geographically, demographically, and politically. The state obviously has a high Asian American and Pacific Islander influence.

As one can see above, the state is pretty blue throughout, with Republicans best performance coming from the western half of Honolulu County where Trump kept it close in 2020.

While the state has had some significant swings back and forth in the past 2 decades, it seems unlikely to become politically competative without realignment given how homogenous the state is. Republicans would need to figure out a way to overcome Honolulu the City's vote.

Honestly, the poltiical geography of Hawaii is kinda boring imo, but still glad to have another one down.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Not doing state by state update anymore, but I got most of the least populated states done so the mountain states and small northeastern ones are complete.

A few thoughts:

-NH precincts, especially in the SouthWest corner are really large and hence annoying to work with. Precincts should never exceed 10k people let alone 30k.

-Maine really looks like it should be more R than it actually is; the Dem packing into Portland is pretty insane plus the turnout differences allowed Biden to win the state by 9%. Just looking at the map it looks like a roughly tied result statewide

-This map kinda exposes the problem for Rs in CT and RI which some seem to believe could become more competitive federally down the road; both states are incredibly urban/suburban nature, and barring a change in coalition, the R votes likely just aren't there as the GOP becomes more based in rural and working class communities. To a lesser degree, this is also true in DE and NH; it's not too hard to see the Southern parts of NH making the state likely D.

-All of Idahos "cities" outside Boise are really R for their size, mostly because of mormons and just conservative (and often racist cultures) intwined in many. This is why the state is R + 30 even though the Boise metro is over 1/3rd the population.

-There seems to be a pretty solid divide between SD and NE rural politically, though maybe Native voters in SD gives the imrpession it's larger than it actually is. Also much of rural NE is really rural (liek moreso than the mountain states) and the state is overall pretty urban, though these communities are a mixed bag politically.

-High turnout ski communities can really matter in these college/resort states. It's the reason why MT is so much closer politically than the states around it despite Helena, Bozeman, and Missoula being pretty small.

-Much of rural America isn't as R as people make it to be, Biden still got above 20% in most communities and quite rarely drops below 15% for extended stretches. A bit interesting to think about because that's a pretty sizeable chunk of the electorate that is often not discussed.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Also please lmk if you see any errors. I always try to check before uploading a map but it can be hard for 1 person to sort through thousands of tracks.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Added Oregon, Kansas, and Oklahoma which are the first midsized states

A few more thoughts:

Oregon:

-It's amazing how Portland has basically no R suburbs; all suburbs voted for Biden

-Very few folks actually live in Eastern Oregon; most of Rs biggest nets are in the Southwest part of the state where midsized communities like Medford voted for Trump

-Lane County (home to Euguene) has a very clear political outline

Kansas:

-More than a county map one can see how concentrated the population centers are (which net Ds votes) realtive to rural communities

-A lot of the Overland Park area is actually pretty blue; Rs just net a ton of votes from exurban precincts in Johnson County keeping it close. That's not to say Dems still can't gain though

-There's quite a prominent development divide between KS and OK with Oklahoma rurals being significantly more dense

-Democrats due suprisingly decent in a few small communities in southwest Kansas such as Garden City and Dodge City where they actually win tracts. Likely has to do with Hispanic population but if so, then why don't we see a simillar phenomenon in western TX?

Oklahoma:

-It's rurals throughout are quite dense

-OKC but especially Tulsa have a lot of very conservative suburbs; this and dense rurals explainging why Rs tend to blowout statewide in OK and Dems fail to win a single County

-Any strength Dems previously may have had in eastern Oklahoma counties with notable native populations has completely faded

-Lawton has really weird political geography, likely in part due to the university, but the scatter of D and R precincts is quite interesting

[ProgressiveModerate]

BTW some larger states are needing to be split into segments; trying to load all 9000 of Cali's tracts at once is cursed.

So like if you see a state with only 1 county or a segment loaded in your computer is working just fine

[ProgressiveModerate]

This project isn't dead, but I did take a break. Currently getting a lot of annoying states/state segments overwith.

[ProgressiveModerate]

After tons of lag and suffering, finally finished LA County!



Cook County is done as well so from here on out things should be easier. I'm almost done with Kings + Queens (NYC) which should be up tmrw.

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

A few more thoughts:

Oregon:

-It's amazing how Portland has basically no R suburbs; all suburbs voted for Biden

We definitely have R exurbs, particularly in Clark County. I was mildly surprised North Plains flipped in 2020, if only because Biden consolidated the 2016 3rd-party vote.

Re: Los Angeles County- is it just me, or did 45 win the Korean-heavy areas next to Orange County and a couple precincts around Diamond Bar?

[ProgressiveModerate]

A few more thoughts:

Oregon:

-It's amazing how Portland has basically no R suburbs; all suburbs voted for Biden

We definitely have R exurbs, particularly in Clark County. I was mildly surprised North Plains flipped in 2020, if only because Biden consolidated the 2016 3rd-party vote.

Re: Los Angeles County- is it just me, or did 45 win the Korean-heavy areas next to Orange County and a couple precincts around Diamond Bar?

Yeah there are a lot of Asian R/swingy pockets in both LA and NY.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Reminder of how tiny and dense NY is (Staten Island isn't yet done but the otehr 4 boroughs are). A random PA County could basically hold all 4 boroughs within it. Just look at the sphere of influence of State College in PA compared to NYC; pretty remarkable.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Finished TN! I'm sharing this because I think it's quite telling as to why TN has such a stubborn R lean. The Appalachia Part of the state is extremely dense and also extremely Republican, and unlike many rural regions in the South, is actually growing.

Some have argued TN could become like a mini-Texas because of the insane growth and shifts we've seen in Nasheville, however, because of how dense rurals are it'd take a lot more than most people probably assume. Furthermore, Memphis has been bleeding which makes Nasheville's task lot more steep.

Finally, basically every city is extremely racially polarized with many white suburbs and exurbs still giving Rs really insane margins, and is why places like Chattnooga and Knoxville actually net votes for the GOP despite being of decent size. Even in liberal Nasheville, a lot of the whiter suburbs and exurbs are quite stubborn, and in Memphis you can clearly see the racial soring of blacks and whites in whether a place votes D or R. If racial depolarization hits these suburbs as we've begun to see in some parts of NC and KY, then it could make the state closer but probably not enough to be truly competative. It could however give Dems quite a large geography advantage simillar to what we see in TX where Rs are overpacked into rural districts while Dems win a lot of 60-40 or 55-45 suburban seats, and all the hyper-D seats are low turnout to begin with meaning less wasted votes from those.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Thought I'd share Colorado cause I feel like it gives a good perspective on just how dominating the Denver area is and why Rs likely won't be making major comebacks anytime soon. Another thing that really hurts Rs is they used to get insane Margins out of the Colorado Springs area and while Trump still won El Paso County, he only won it by a little over 10 which is nowhere near enough to cancel out Denver. I also find it funny how quickly Denver fades into farmland going east.

Finally, I notice that Colorado is a clear example of counties having clear political identities. Boulder County obviously stands out very clearly, but there's also quite a stark divide between Laramie and Weld Counties, plus as soon as one exits Denver proper things get like 20 points redder. As soon as you enter Douglas county, things get more conservative really fast.

[Bismarck]

These are great. Thanks for putting in all this work. I’m excited to see how central Indiana looks.

[ProgressiveModerate]

These are great. Thanks for putting in all this work. I’m excited to see how central Indiana looks.

Thank you Indiana is on queue for soon!

[ProgressiveModerate]

These are great. Thanks for putting in all this work. I’m excited to see how central Indiana looks.

Overall here are a few interesting notes:

-I think there needs to be more discussion around Indianapolis's southern suburbs. They're quite vast and growing, however, seem a lot more akin to working class Macomb County suburbs rather than high education suburbs zooming left. They swung pretty hard right between 2012 and 2016 but then Biden got some pretty heavy swings in them. While Indiana is unlikely to become competative statewide, Dems doing better there could give them a few extra legistlative seats.

-Despite their collapse, Dems def still have some residual support in Southern Indiana rural areas which are noticeably less red than rurals a few counties north

-For not being a college town, Dems actually do pretty well in South Bend considering a lot of the suburbs have been blueified. On the flip side, Republicans net a lot of votes from Ft Wayne area, but it has been narrowing. Also the GOP does insanely well in Elkhart right next to South Bend. I wonder if there’s some political sorting between the communities.

-Indiana rural areas are very consistently dense throughout

[Sol]

These are great. Thanks for putting in all this work. I’m excited to see how central Indiana looks.

Overall here are a few interesting notes:

-I think there needs to be more discussion around Indianapolis's southern suburbs. They're quite vast and growing, however, seem a lot more akin to working class Macomb County suburbs rather than high education suburbs zooming left. They swung pretty hard right between 2012 and 2016 but then Biden got some pretty heavy swings in them. While Indiana is unlikely to become competative statewide, Dems doing better there could give them a few extra legistlative seats.

-Despite their collapse, Dems def still have some residual support in Southern Indiana rural areas which are noticeably less red than rurals a few counties north

-For not being a college town, Dems actually do pretty well in South Bend considering a lot of the suburbs have been blueified. On the flip side, Republicans net a lot of votes from Ft Wayne area, but it has been narrowing. Also the GOP does insanely well in Elkhart right next to South Bend. I wonder if there’s some political sorting between the communities.

-Indiana rural areas are very consistently dense throughout

Very interesting stuff, and I agree that Indiana politics is often underdiscussed. IIRC a lot of industrial towns in Indiana, especially the north, are kind of historically not-too-unionized areas where industry has been a bit more robust even in recent years, and I think that's a profile that often results in Republican voting because it means there are a lot of non-degreed workers with middle class incomes. IIRC Warsaw/Elkhart/South Bend and surrounds have a lot of this sort of economic base, and I think this is true of Fort Wayne too.

South Bend is a college town, fyi.

[ProgressiveModerate]

These are great. Thanks for putting in all this work. I’m excited to see how central Indiana looks.

Overall here are a few interesting notes:

-I think there needs to be more discussion around Indianapolis's southern suburbs. They're quite vast and growing, however, seem a lot more akin to working class Macomb County suburbs rather than high education suburbs zooming left. They swung pretty hard right between 2012 and 2016 but then Biden got some pretty heavy swings in them. While Indiana is unlikely to become competative statewide, Dems doing better there could give them a few extra legistlative seats.

-Despite their collapse, Dems def still have some residual support in Southern Indiana rural areas which are noticeably less red than rurals a few counties north

-For not being a college town, Dems actually do pretty well in South Bend considering a lot of the suburbs have been blueified. On the flip side, Republicans net a lot of votes from Ft Wayne area, but it has been narrowing. Also the GOP does insanely well in Elkhart right next to South Bend. I wonder if there’s some political sorting between the communities.

-Indiana rural areas are very consistently dense throughout

Very interesting stuff, and I agree that Indiana politics is often underdiscussed. IIRC a lot of industrial towns in Indiana, especially the north, are kind of historically not-too-unionized areas where industry has been a bit more robust even in recent years, and I think that's a profile that often results in Republican voting because it means there are a lot of non-degreed workers with middle class incomes. IIRC Warsaw/Elkhart/South Bend and surrounds have a lot of this sort of economic base, and I think this is true of Fort Wayne too.

South Bend is a college town, fyi.

Ye fair enough South Bend does have Notre Dame, but I tend to think of Notre Dame as a bit more conservative. Ig what I meant by college town was like specifically a town that entirely revolves around some massive liberal university (Ithaca, Ann-Arbor, Bloomington, Athens, ect).

I personally think Trump hit pretty close to the realistic GOP ceiling in the state in 2016, even though there are a few communities where they may be able to squeeze out a bit more. The small town nature of much of the northeast area of the state really hurts Dems cause these relatively dense rurals and small towns net the GOP a ton of votes without any real union sort of communities to negate the impact a bit. Compared to the surrounding midwestern states not only is it the most R overall but culturally it feels more conservative and unions (or lack of) may be a good part of that reason.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Contig 48 so far.

Alaska and Hawaii are also done. Plz request states or segments of states you'd like done soon, preferably no more than about 5 million folks in total.

[_.]

Contig 48 so far.

Alaska and Hawaii are also done. Plz request states or segments of states you'd like done soon, preferably no more than about 5 million folks in total.

Miami-Dade and Broward Counties

[ProgressiveModerate]

Contig 48 so far.

Alaska and Hawaii are also done. Plz request states or segments of states you'd like done soon, preferably no more than about 5 million folks in total.

Miami-Dade and Broward Counties

Was thinking about doing Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties all in one group if that's cool