The map above shows how the 2016 US Presidential election might go if only one demographic group got the vote. The map was created by Ste Kinney-Fields and is based on data from from fivethirtyeight and 270towin. You can read the full article here.
Disclaimer: This post was written before the 2016 election results, so was a best guess as to how each group would vote.
In summary, this how many electoral votes Clinton and Trump might get if the following groups were the only ones allowed to vote:
- People of Colour*: Clinton 538, Trump: 0
- Women: Clinton 461, Trump: 71
- College Educated Whites: Clinton 216, Trump: 322
- White Women: Clinton 211, Trump: 327
- White People: Clinton 169, Trump: 369
- Men: Clinton 158, Trump: 350
- Non-College educated Whites: Clinton 64, Trump: 474
- White Men: Clinton 45, Trump: 493
*Note this include all splits by ethnicity, gender and education.
All I can say is thank god US elections are no longer determined by white men.
For more 2016 US election maps see:
- If “Did Not Vote” Had Been A Candidate In The 2016 US Presidential Election, It Would Have Won By a Landslide
- Counties That Changed Party In The 2016 US Presidential Election VS 2012
- 2016 US Presidential Election Map By County & Vote Share
- How Whites Voted In The 2016 US Presidential Election by State & County
If you found this map interesting please share:
Robert Basset says
Your howling political bias and constant agenda edging is turning your site into a farce. Stop with the snidey, snivelling comments tacked onto the end of the maps.
We also see clearly now why the Democrats are so keen on mass illegal immigration.
dcatela says
o….k….
Esteban Díaz says
Illegal immigrants don’t vote, right?
Kurt S. Paulsen says
Is that even a serious counter argument?
The point is that there’s a trade off.
The party willing to facilitate and reward those who violate the law,
can trade this for votes within communities that value ethnic solidarity
more than national identity, fair play, or the rule of law.
It’s a corruption of the democratic process.
Esteban Díaz Pantin says
Yeah right… Is amazing how you think that illegal and probably also legal immigrants stand for democrats. You put everybody on the same basquet. Asians voted republican. In Florida, a lot of immigrants and cuban americans voted republicans. The fact of the matter is that the clear winner among immigrant communities is the voter abstention. What you as republican should fear as your leaders do is education. The more you educate the people, the less votes republicans are going to get.
The only minorities republicans stand for is the top 1%. They have this stupid idea that if the top 1% is good, everybody else will be also good.
Kurt S. Paulsen says
That’s utter nonsense. Really, a poor attempt at a counterargument.
“amazing how you think that illegal and probably also legal immigrants
stand for democrats. You put everybody on the same [basket]… What you as republican should fear”
Ironically you’re accusing me of something I haven’t done and in the same breath doing that very thing yourself.
a) I never claimed that all immigrants are participating in the Democratic party’s attempt to corrupt democracy. I said that this trade (effectively a bribe) of nullifying the law in order to garner more votes works in communities that value ethnic solidarity more than national identity, fair play, or the rule of law.”
Perhaps you think that that all immigrants are members of such communities. I don’t think that. That would be silly. However, it’s even sillier to suggest that such communities don’t exist at all. That’s demonstrably false and the Democrats have been very blatant about pandering to them.
b) You’re assuming that because I am against sabotaging the law and creating an unjust immigration system where those who break the rules fare better than those who follow them, that I am a Republican. I’m not. Just because I am offended by some of the things one party does, does not mean that I am not offended by anything the other party does. I don’t like either of the two majority parties.
My main grievance with the Democrats is that I see them as engaging in tactics which subvert the law and violate the principle of democracy. One example is immigration, but a more important example is their enthusiasm for judicial activism. At the same time, I’m not a fan of the Republicans either.
My main objection to them is that I think that they are insufficiently concerned about the economic welfare of those who are worst off and for ideological reasons are unreasonably reticent about to interfere in the operation of free markets or spend more money even when that is the right and just thing to do to help those who are struggling and in poverty.
I don’t belong to any party. FWIW, in the last four presidential contests, I’ve voted for the Republican candidate twice, the Democratic candidate once, and a third party candidate once. Statistically at least, that makes me a great deal less partisan than the average American.
Driver711 says
Haaaa your having a laugh! Democrats don’t want education they want bigger teachers unions.
blackacidlizzard says
“Asians voted republican”
Asians haven’t voted republican since the 1990s.
GUEST says
Did you see the map for college educated whites, it’s pretty red.
322 vs 216, pretty big win.
Per Roper Center / Cornell exit polls, by income, 50K and under voted obama 2012 (almost 2:1) and Hillary 2016. (sub 50K probably not college educated!) 50-100K favored R by 5-10 %, above 100K favored Romney by 10 but even for Trump.
Dems own the uneducated vote. like it or not.
Nuke Rusich says
Asians voted 87% Clinton. Who told you that they voted Republican, one of those “well 2% of blacks voted for David Duke in Louisiana’s Senate election polls” type losers who’ll do anything to make race seem irrelevant?
Some subgroups of Asians and Hispanics did vote Republican, and some minority-majority counties did vote Republican, but no race except white voted Republican.
William_JD says
Asians vote 75% Democrat.
Carl Smith says
There is a world of difference between Education and Indoctrination. Public Education no longer TEACHES Critical Thinking but “Here is how to pass the Required TEST”. I’m 80 and have told my Children and Grand and almost Great Grand Children that Education is a Journey NOT a Destination and higher “education” is Learning How to Learn.
Lenin passed on to the Progressives that in order for Socialism to succeed you need a class of “Useful Idiots” My question to all the Pro D crowd is where do you fit in the scheme of preserving our CONSTITUTIONAL (NOT Democratic) REPUBLIC?
Dallas says
I think this map site is a joke. You think educating minorities willbturn them democrat? lol You need to wake up! many,many minorities are educating themselves and they are turning their backs on the left. And that is because the left is the party of hate and intolerance.
Christine Fulgham says
So proud to be from Washington State.
William McBrayer says
The party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow, and who opposed the 19th Amendment and civil rights legislation, is supported by women and blacks. #irony
William_JD says
The KKK was a very strong supporter of the 19th Amendment, and of the 18th Amendment — and of women, which was the common denominator for the support of the18th and 19th Amendments.
The second Klan were “progressive”, and they spent most of heir “energy” protecting women and children from men who beat their wives or drank too mush and neglected their families.
Lewis Lanier Sr. says
Man don’t be an idiot you know what made Southern states turn red. I hate when people say you know the Dems where this and that back before the party changed and Dems signs the civil rights act.
Kilojeesus says
How would one need to go about making things better for immigrants to not be blamed for fishing for votes.
I mean, assuming that it is possible to genuinely care about people.
Nuke Rusich says
Some states make illegal voting easy, such as California, where over 10% of workers are illegal — and, by coincidence, without California, Hillary Clinton lost the popular vote. Gee…
Robert Eckert says
California does not even make legal voting easy. Supposedly, when I changed my license to a California one, I could register to vote as well, but it did not go through, and no-one would tell me why or how to fix it. An illegal immigrant cannot vote there, and if you know anything at all about California you would know why most Californians despise Republicans. I assure you that Hillary’s margin there did not need any extra boosting.
Nuke Rusich says
That’s because you’re still closed-minded and don’t realize that they discriminate against white people and actual citizens. That’s what your case sounds like. Or maybe you’re lying.
Furthermore, there are already videotaped confessions regarding election-rigging in New York City because the normally much more massive margins of victory for Democrats there weren’t enough to push the whole popular vote nationwide. Of course, NYC alone isn’t big enough, however — that’d push turnout over 100% in all likelihood.
But California? They’ve got a huge population, and it’s reasonably left-wing. Of course, your ridiculous theory makes it so that the Democrats wouldn’t actually make gains in California — and here’s a hint. They did. They gained a variety of counties won by John McCain and Mitt Romney. In addition, turnout skyrocketed — and all for Clinton. Trump lost votes and Clinton gained over a million.
In other words, perhaps the routine violence that the Democrats use to silence Trump supporters in California (as they have done on camera many times) played a crucial role. Maybe the white voters were denied the right to vote. But somehow, turnout in California skyrocketed — entirely in favor of one candidate — while turnout went down for the other side. The only plausible way to explain this is that the party of violence and murder, the Democrats, used another Philadelphia 2008 or ACORN style plan (By the way, the last time Democrats got such good results in California was when ACORN fucked with the election results.) to reduce Republican turnout. We all know your “Trump got less votes than Romney.” lie only worked when the votes weren’t fully counted for the former. But you expect me to believe that, while Trump got two million votes more than Romney, Clinton would outperform Obama in California so much so that she would defeat Trump nationwide using only the gigantic margin of victory in one state where the Democrats have enough control to rig an election? Give me a break.
Plus, the Democrats were caught planning a scheme to use illegal voters to win the midterms using illegally-run SuperPACs (Way to go, you broke the few remaining laws on unregulated campaign organizations.) — without having been given time in advance, and they knew the intricate details of each state’s weaknesses in terms of preventative legislation to protect against them, getting as specific as to say that they could use the corporate IDs of illegal workers in Illinois (where they refuse to deport convicted murderers who have finished their sentences) to vote, and they could hire workers solely for the purpose of voting with them. Many of these Democratic big-shots are illegals, too. Hmm, perhaps they could be able to vote?
Of course, your skyrocketing turnout is occurring in a year where turnout was down, and your candidate got less votes than Obama got in 2012. But you continue to deny, correct?
So how bad does this have to be, man? Where do you stop and say “OK maybe in a country where an estimated 3% of the voters on our voter registrations are known to be dead, missing, non-citizens, etc., many registered voters don’t vote, one party specifically pushes for legislation against extra protections for the voting system, and those same politicians use the popular vote as a rationale to prevent anything from getting done in Congress, perhaps the 3% margin on the popular vote could be fraudulent. The possibility is large enough that this isn’t a good reason to hold up the passage of legislation and executive appointments.” (Yes, you’re still holding up executive appointments using the 1 or 2 Republicans you can bribe. Good job!) Where can you stop using this as a justification to screw with us, and mind your own business?
Never.
Robert Eckert says
You need to up your medications.
Nuke Rusich says
I’m sure that medications will make me left-wing like you.
If there is seriously such a medicine, I believe it may be reasonable to state its purpose is to control people’s behavior. Perhaps it’s “medical marijuana”? Yes, this could seriously dull your ability to think and cause Leftism.
Stop letting drugs control you.
Robert Eckert says
That’s what you’re reduced to? “I know you are but what am I”? Listen, you sound absolutely nuts when you go on this big rant about how you can’t believe Californians were especially repulsed by Trump. You don’t have to agree that people are right to find him repulsive in order to understand who does find him repulsive. No, there is no mystery whatsoever why more than half the country is against him, and for the most part it doesn’t have to do with leftist politics. It has to do with knowing people of all kinds of backgrounds that Trump loves to insult and threaten.
Nuke Rusich says
California was recently ordered to stop obstructing justice, since they were refusing to present evidence of the suspected rigging of their election to sway the nationwide popular vote.
“That’s what you’re reduced to?”
“‘I know you are but what am I?'”
“Listen, you sound absolutely nuts”
You need to up your medications.
Robert Eckert says
“California was recently ordered to stop obstructing justice” What the actual fuck are you talking about???
Jerry Whidby says
Illegals cannot vote, but they can pump out crap tons of future Democrat constituents. Democrats are playing the long game. Less than half of the children under 15 are white right now. Tic Toc. It’s just a matter of time.
BJ001 says
If Democrats thought for one moment that illegals were potential Republican voters they would have had a huge wall built over the border that would make the Great Wall of China look like just a little dot on the map.
sashamanda says
How to conquer a country: mass immigration.
Ewan MacKenzie says
Yep, that’s how the white folks conquered the Americas in the first place.
ISUringman1974 says
It’s called…exploring and frontiering. What impact on the world did the U.S. have prior to 1776? Why have so many people admired the U.S. since 1776, and sacrificed in order to come to the U.S. to work and to raise their families and to live in a free society since 1776? Yep, that’s right — the U.S. became a place where people have the opportunity to improve their lives and the lives of their children. In the U.S., as inequalities, unfairness, and other areas that needed to be improved so that ALL citizens have LIBERTY, life, and the pursuit of happiness have been recognized, improvements HAVE BEEN MADE! The Democratic Party has an abysmal record in these areas, but they are exceptionally good at one thing: marketing. People of color continue to vote for Democratic politicians because of the Dem’s marketing and not due to results. Hopefully, facts will eventually overrule marketing.
Ewan MacKenzie says
Pretty sure Native Americans, particularly those who were present during the almost complete genocide of their people, wouldn’t agree with much of what you say there. You probably think that your culture is better than what was there before, but all colonists think that.
GQman says
Regarding Native Americans, let’s be fair, they didn’t do much with the place. The discovery by and settlement of Europeans vastly improved the continent by every metric. The United States of America (arguably) wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for those early European settlers.
Aaron Bredon says
And one of the established governments at the time that Europeans immigrated was the Iroquois Confederacy (known as the 5 Civilized tribes). Wars fought by the European immigrants, diseases brought by the European immigrants, and European and US policies killed them. The Cherokee were illegally force-marched (with thousands dying along the Trail of Tears) across the country because the US wanted the resources on their land. The US broke every treaty they signed with the exisiting countries whenever breaking the treaty would bring profit to rich US people (white men). This is all well documented.
Kilojeesus says
How to conquer a country: blame the minorities.
sashamanda says
Who is blaming the minorities? They simply don’t place the same value on rule of law, individual liberty, and other “western values.”
Kilojeesus says
I think you just answered your own question.
sashamanda says
Americans never voted for open borders or massive immigration. We have as much right to our cultural values as the Chinese or Africans or Turks have a right to theirs.
Hexa says
Good for you America! Go Trump! Us Europeans are slowly catching up. This mass immigration agenda is completely undemocratic and against the will of the people.
Kilojeesus says
You’ve gone off the deep end. You think you know these things after seeing a picture on facebook and a video on youtube. You’ve been scammed. Your ignorance has been used against you by someone that half the US population recognises to be a scam artist.
sashamanda says
You self-righteous jerk.
Piecenik says
The Native Americans (“Indians”) are the only people who were here before your European ancestors immigrated. You’re right; the Native people did not vote for your ancestors to massively immigrate and take over with no regard for law or the cultural values of the people that were already here.
sashamanda says
So? Because Europeans settled the US 300 years ago, let’s let the third world invade the US today? Or is your comment only meant to show your moral superiority?
Piecenik says
No. My comment is made to provide some food for thought. People don’t have the right to take over someone’s land and then demand that other people stay away. Unless, of course, you are one who believes that might makes right. In that case we have nothing to discuss.
sashamanda says
Well, aren’t you smart. The rest of us did not realize that Native Americans were native to America. Most of us don’t believe that might makes right — we believe the past is past and that the past is no reason to commit genetic and cultural suicide
Kilojeesus says
You have a strange understanding of american culture if you think some immigrants are going to damage it.
But when I say strange, I don’t mean something that isn’t known, understood or hasn’t been deconstructed and analysed, at least here in Europe. We are very familiar with views that promote genetic purity, which as a concept is ridiculous to people who are familiar with genetics, movement of peoples, populist political rhetoric and lets just say history.
Lisa Simons says
I would revise that last sentence to say that the past is no reason to commit genetic and cultural genocide.
RobW says
I thought they came from Asia and now Europe across land and ice bridges. There are no native Americans.
William_JD says
That’s right, the past is the past, and ex post facto laws are inconsistent with the most fundamental tenets of fairness.
If we can get everybody on board with something like Frank Salter’s “Universal Nationalism”, great!
But that was not true in the past, and is not true now, and one can’t capriciously and retroactively (and selectively!) apply a rule that is not even universally recognized today.
Whiskey Jim says
Of course they do. It is the history of the world.
William_JD says
No, people don’t have the right to take someone else’s land on the theory that it belongs TO A THIRD PARTY!
If you really believe that, YOU need to get out too.
Andrew Konigs says
They didn’t build a modern nation state and major world power either. There were barely 1 million people in what is now the USA when English, Spanish, Dutch and French settlers started establishing colonies along US coastline in the 15 and 1600s
ISUringman1974 says
It’s called…exploring and frontiering. What impact on the world did the U.S. have prior to 1776? Why have so many people admired the U.S. since 1776, and sacrificed in order to come to the U.S. to work and to raise their families and to live in a free society since 1776? Yep, that’s right — the U.S. became a place where people have the opportunity to improve their lives and the lives of their children. In the U.S., as inequalities, unfairness, and other areas that needed to be improved so that ALL citizens have LIBERTY, life, and the pursuit of happiness have been recognized, improvements HAVE BEEN MADE!
GQman says
The Europeans that discovered America were settlers and explorers, they were not immigrants. Being an immigrant would imply that the nation had sovereign control over its borders – it didn’t. At that time, “America” (which wasn’t in existence) was a sparely populated continent possessing no sophisticated culture or development of any kind. There was also no “Law” to abide to or constitution that governed the land. Without European discovery and settlement, it is arguable that the greatest nation in existence would not have been conceived.
Nuke Rusich says
We know you won’t be happy until even Europe is predominantly black.
Kilojeesus says
Nobody believes in “islamisation” except idiots who haven’t learned to think independently and check their sources.
These claims have never been backed by facts. All articles I’ve been shown on “islamisation” or whatever you’re referring to, I’ve refuted easily. It’s a little time-consuming, but if you want to show me one, I’ll be happy to take a look.
Nuke Rusich says
I didn’t actually use the phrase Islamization. Thanks to your Freudian slip, we now know you, specifically, are a supporter of “killing Jesus” — that is, Christianity — as indicated by your name. By the way, nice how your white genocide is matched by census statistics in the US — but your genocidal dictators have abolished statistic-taking in Europe. Isn’t that suspicious? Now only hearsay is viable, so sometimes cities are mostly nonwhite and sometimes they’re 70% white. How about that? Yeah, it’s hard to cite properly — but doesn’t outlawing statistics make you look really fucking suspicious, jackass?
Kilojeesus says
The name refers to a thousand units of Jesus. It is an ironic joke. Evidently, I am an atheist, and therefore a supporter of secularisation.
As far as I understand, the reason for not keeping statistics for the whiteness of populations is that it is hard (if not impossible) and pointless.
I’m aware that you didn’t use the phrase ‘islamisation’, I just used it as a roof concept for whatever conspiracy or racial theory you’re keen on. Since you seem more worried about African population growth rate, here’s some statistical knowledge:
African women’s fertility rate has been falling since the 1970s, world population growth since the 1960s, and the population growth of least developed countries since 1995.
William_JD says
That makes no sense whatsoever. The point of this article and the maps above is that IT IS 100% CORRECT to blame “the minorities”. The author just proved it!
Kilojeesus says
You are saying that on the basis that people of colour don’t vote against themselves, they can be blamed for what exactly?
In case you didn’t notice, I was answering to someone with my first comment. Might make more sense seen that way.
William_JD says
They can be blamed for taking the country away from the people who built it.
Kilojeesus says
How would you see that has happened?
Just because the democrats aren’t as hard on immigrants as the republicans are, doesn’t mean that the democrats aren’t a representation of “the people who built it”.
Karl W South says
Non-US readers would probably benefit from a definition of the American term ‘People of Color’.
Robert Basset says
It is the old-timey term “Colored people” but rehashed by PC libtards with zero rationality behind it.
Nuke Rusich says
Yeah, it helps to add that it’s a euphemism which sees largely partisan use.
Nuke Rusich says
Non-European
Piecenik says
For some reason the numbers for “women” and for “men” don’t add up to 538 like all the others do. Women are short 6 EC votes, and men are short 30.
TruthMakesPeace says
To say there is something wrong with white men is being racist.
blackacidlizzard says
Whites built America, Whites maintain America. Non-Whites always vote against the desires of Whites.
William_JD says
More accurately, they always vote to take what belongs to whites.
8moongirl says
I love this; and way to go, Washington State !
Peter Gosinyah says
Another site of garbage for us to enjoy
bishop911 says
How dare those white people vote.
zakin says
There may be a mistake with Iowa and Wisconsin. They both went red, but on these maps they’re blue for both “people of color” and “white people”.
rhamilton says
Wisconsin, where Trump won by only 0.8 points, might be correct, but Iowa, where Trump won by 9.4 points, cannot be correct.
UserFriendlyyy says
If only white people voted Clinton wins wisconsin? so you are saying the Black vote tipped it to Trump?
rhamilton says
Map 4 (“White People) clearly has incorrectly scored Wisconsin and Iowa for Hillary.
Map 5 (“White Women”) probably has incorrectly scored Iowa for Hillary.
Map 6 (“College-educated Whites”) clearly has incorrectly scored Iowa for Hillary.
Map 7 (“Non-college-educated Whites”) clearly has incorrectly scored Iowa for Hillary.
Nuke Rusich says
All of the maps also wrongly assume that Hillary won the race.
Steven Buck says
Funny how the electoral college makes most of those maps look like Republicans are a majority in the U.S. And when it comes to redistricting, why wouldn’t we have impartial drawing done for districts? One more thing, Just bc one ‘brand’ of American is concentrated in rural or urban areas shouldn’t effect what takes the whole state, right?
BJ001 says
Whoever wrote this piece sounds a bit racist and sexist themselves.
BJ001 says
LOL Trump would have still won if college-educated whites voted. What is the leftard who wrote this piece trying to prove here?
raheel says
There is a massive divide in America with White against Color interesting.
repsak says
FAKE NEWS, literally.
Wait, so this is a map made BEFORE the election? Is that some kind of joke? Why would we care about how people were guessing the vote was going to turn out?
The only value would be to see if pollsters are accurate and should be believed, by putting the before and after the vote maps side by side. But that means actual, real maps need to be made.
TheGoyWonder ✓ᴵˢˡᵃᵐᵒᵖʰᵒᵇᵉ says
what about Jews?
Andrew Konigs says
Map is off .. Minesota, New Hampshire and Iowa would go Trump if only whites voted.. In fact Iowa did go for Trump by about 10 points.
James Stonefield says
These maps exhibit the terrible consequences of the Clinton/Democratic Party’s identity politics and multiculturalism by race that is dividing Americans more deeply.
There still are American values, freedoms and common goals that unify all Americans if only Democrats would advocate them. A good start would be English as the national language and the multilingual ability an advantageous life skill. Then honoring the Flag, the National Anthem. and Pledge of Allegiance.
If anything, maybe it’s time to rediscover the power of the 10th Amendment.
ADDgolfer says
The maps although interesting, are a best guess. A projection of previous elections, with poll thrown in no doubt? We were shown how bias and wrong the polls were.
The map creator and or this site is bias…
“All I can say is thank god US elections are no longer determined by white men.”
Perhaps why we don’t see an updated map.
A shame the prejudices of the left makes them unable to be professional.
Of course they don’t care, as long as they are popular and acknowledged inside their bubbles.
Ed says
Great maps, but I was puzzled until today. Trump carried Wisconsin and Iowa, so most likely he won more White people’s votes in those states, and maybe in Minnesota as well. I didn’t realize you made the maps before the election. You might consider redoing them in light of the election results. Maybe before the next election.
bob says
Where’s the map of votes by blacks without a high school diploma?
Blue Collar Scholar says
Likely combined with the “incarcerated by race” map
Bo says
Disclaimer: This post was written before the 2016 election results, so was a best guess as to how each group would vote.
Uh?
This post should be taken down now. The image above is a seed for viral misinformation.
Kirk VandenBerghe says
It would be very interesting to see this map with 2020 results. Are there any plans to generate one?
Brilliant Maps says
Need to wait on final results, then we’ll see.
Eve says
Two comments:
1. Jews have the same map as people of color
2. White men have to got to your rooms and have a think about what you’ve done.
Joshua says
New map for this election in 2020?
Brilliant Maps says
Need to wait on the final results.
Rachel Gordon says
PLEASE update this with 2020 election data!
Brilliant Maps says
Final results are not out yet, so it’s not currently possible.
Jeffery Ruben says
So we are to deduce that People Of Color represent the brightest, best educated, most independent self sufficient group in the world.