Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections - Data Graphs

Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.

Data for this Contest was Contributed by on 2020-04-30

Map

Map

Alamance	Cunningham	59.7%
	Smith	31.6%
	Other	8.7%

Alexander	Cunningham	69.8%
	Smith	21.1%
	Other	9.0%

Alleghany	Cunningham	72.9%
	Smith	16.3%
	Other	10.7%

Anson	Cunningham	72.5%
	Smith	19.8%
	Other	7.7%

Ashe	Cunningham	75.0%
	Smith	17.6%
	Other	7.4%

Avery	Cunningham	72.7%
	Smith	20.6%
	Other	6.7%

Beaufort	Cunningham	57.3%
	Smith	34.9%
	Other	7.9%

Bertie	Cunningham	26.3%
	Smith	67.7%
	Other	6.0%

Bladen	Cunningham	33.2%
	Smith	58.0%
	Other	8.8%

Brunswick	Cunningham	71.7%
	Smith	22.3%
	Other	6.0%

Buncombe	Cunningham	58.0%
	Smith	32.7%
	Other	9.4%

Burke	Cunningham	68.8%
	Smith	22.3%
	Other	8.8%

Cabarrus	Cunningham	57.5%
	Smith	32.8%
	Other	9.7%

Caldwell	Cunningham	67.5%
	Smith	24.6%
	Other	7.9%

Camden	Cunningham	40.8%
	Smith	43.9%
	Other	15.3%

Carteret	Cunningham	73.3%
	Smith	20.4%
	Other	6.3%

Caswell	Cunningham	47.7%
	Smith	41.4%
	Other	10.9%

Catawba	Cunningham	65.8%
	Smith	25.9%
	Other	8.3%

Chatham	Cunningham	72.3%
	Smith	21.5%
	Other	6.2%

Cherokee	Cunningham	54.3%
	Smith	33.2%
	Other	12.5%

Chowan	Cunningham	37.6%
	Smith	51.6%
	Other	10.8%

Clay	Cunningham	55.9%
	Smith	33.6%
	Other	10.5%

Cleveland	Cunningham	59.9%
	Smith	31.9%
	Other	8.1%

Columbus	Cunningham	49.8%
	Smith	39.7%
	Other	10.6%

Craven	Cunningham	57.2%
	Smith	36.3%
	Other	6.5%

Cumberland	Cunningham	50.4%
	Smith	40.6%
	Other	9.0%

Currituck	Cunningham	41.0%
	Smith	42.3%
	Other	16.7%

Dare	Cunningham	52.6%
	Smith	35.0%
	Other	12.5%

Davidson	Cunningham	71.0%
	Smith	21.6%
	Other	7.4%

Davie	Cunningham	71.0%
	Smith	21.0%
	Other	8.0%

Duplin	Cunningham	58.2%
	Smith	31.4%
	Other	10.4%

Durham	Cunningham	45.2%
	Smith	49.8%
	Other	5.0%

Edgecombe	Cunningham	44.5%
	Smith	47.7%
	Other	7.9%

Forsyth	Cunningham	60.9%
	Smith	31.5%
	Other	7.6%

Franklin	Cunningham	50.2%
	Smith	41.9%
	Other	7.8%

Gaston	Cunningham	58.7%
	Smith	32.9%
	Other	8.4%

Gates	Cunningham	25.1%
	Smith	54.9%
	Other	20.0%

Graham	Cunningham	74.2%
	Smith	16.5%
	Other	9.3%

Granville	Cunningham	54.5%
	Smith	37.1%
	Other	8.4%

Greene	Cunningham	46.4%
	Smith	46.2%
	Other	7.3%

Guilford	Cunningham	51.3%
	Smith	41.4%
	Other	7.3%

Halifax	Cunningham	33.2%
	Smith	59.5%
	Other	7.3%

Harnett	Cunningham	56.9%
	Smith	34.3%
	Other	8.8%

Haywood	Cunningham	69.7%
	Smith	22.2%
	Other	8.1%

Henderson	Cunningham	67.1%
	Smith	24.7%
	Other	8.2%

Hertford	Cunningham	21.6%
	Smith	68.8%
	Other	9.7%

Hoke	Cunningham	47.6%
	Smith	43.9%
	Other	8.5%

Hyde	Cunningham	55.8%
	Smith	34.0%
	Other	10.2%

Iredell	Cunningham	63.2%
	Smith	28.1%
	Other	8.7%

Jackson	Cunningham	61.9%
	Smith	28.0%
	Other	10.1%

Johnston	Cunningham	57.9%
	Smith	33.5%
	Other	8.6%

Jones	Cunningham	51.1%
	Smith	40.3%
	Other	8.6%

Lee	Cunningham	62.1%
	Smith	29.1%
	Other	8.8%

Lenoir	Cunningham	44.1%
	Smith	48.8%
	Other	7.1%

Lincoln	Cunningham	69.9%
	Smith	22.3%
	Other	7.9%

McDowell	Cunningham	63.0%
	Smith	26.0%
	Other	11.1%

Macon	Cunningham	72.3%
	Smith	20.2%
	Other	7.5%

Madison	Cunningham	60.1%
	Smith	28.8%
	Other	11.1%

Martin	Cunningham	34.5%
	Smith	59.0%
	Other	6.5%

Mecklenburg	Cunningham	54.4%
	Smith	35.5%
	Other	10.1%

Mitchell	Cunningham	60.5%
	Smith	29.7%
	Other	9.7%

Montgomery	Cunningham	60.9%
	Smith	28.8%
	Other	10.3%

Moore	Cunningham	71.7%
	Smith	22.9%
	Other	5.4%

Nash	Cunningham	54.9%
	Smith	36.1%
	Other	8.9%

New Hanover	Cunningham	61.6%
	Smith	30.4%
	Other	8.0%

Northampton	Cunningham	21.2%
	Smith	71.3%
	Other	7.5%

Onslow	Cunningham	58.7%
	Smith	32.9%
	Other	8.4%

Orange	Cunningham	64.1%
	Smith	29.6%
	Other	6.3%

Pamlico	Cunningham	56.2%
	Smith	36.9%
	Other	6.9%

Pasquotank	Cunningham	30.0%
	Smith	54.7%
	Other	15.4%

Pender	Cunningham	58.8%
	Smith	32.0%
	Other	9.1%

Perquimans	Cunningham	34.2%
	Smith	50.3%
	Other	15.5%

Person	Cunningham	65.2%
	Smith	26.8%
	Other	8.0%

Pitt	Cunningham	53.7%
	Smith	38.3%
	Other	7.9%

Polk	Cunningham	66.9%
	Smith	25.3%
	Other	7.8%

Randolph	Cunningham	64.7%
	Smith	26.1%
	Other	9.3%

Richmond	Cunningham	49.1%
	Smith	40.2%
	Other	10.7%

Robeson	Cunningham	44.4%
	Smith	37.8%
	Other	17.9%

Rockingham	Cunningham	63.8%
	Smith	28.2%
	Other	8.1%

Rowan	Cunningham	63.8%
	Smith	27.8%
	Other	8.4%

Rutherford	Cunningham	55.4%
	Smith	32.1%
	Other	12.4%

Sampson	Cunningham	50.1%
	Smith	40.4%
	Other	9.4%

Scotland	Cunningham	35.7%
	Smith	49.6%
	Other	14.7%

Stanly	Cunningham	66.0%
	Smith	24.8%
	Other	9.2%

Stokes	Cunningham	74.4%
	Smith	17.8%
	Other	7.8%

Surry	Cunningham	71.2%
	Smith	20.1%
	Other	8.7%

Swain	Cunningham	64.7%
	Smith	25.5%
	Other	9.8%

Transylvania	Cunningham	71.4%
	Smith	21.1%
	Other	7.5%

Tyrrell	Cunningham	48.1%
	Smith	43.5%
	Other	8.4%

Union	Cunningham	61.3%
	Smith	30.1%
	Other	8.6%

Vance	Cunningham	34.9%
	Smith	58.8%
	Other	6.3%

Wake	Cunningham	61.0%
	Smith	31.7%
	Other	7.3%

Warren	Cunningham	32.4%
	Smith	61.6%
	Other	6.0%

Washington	Cunningham	46.0%
	Smith	44.6%
	Other	9.4%

Watauga	Cunningham	63.8%
	Smith	27.7%
	Other	8.5%

Wayne	Cunningham	43.6%
	Smith	47.1%
	Other	9.3%

Wilkes	Cunningham	70.7%
	Smith	21.0%
	Other	8.3%

Wilson	Cunningham	50.0%
	Smith	40.0%
	Other	10.0%

Yadkin	Cunningham	70.4%
	Smith	21.7%
	Other	7.9%

Yancey	Cunningham	70.5%
	Smith	22.4%
	Other	7.1%

National DataGraph for 2020 - North Carolina Results for 2020

Login

Terms of Use - DCMA Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC 2019 All Rights Reserved