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

2020 Gubernatorial General Election Data Graphs - North Carolina

by County

Map

Map

Alamance	Cooper	48.8%
	Forest	49.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Alexander	Cooper	24.7%
	Forest	74.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Alleghany	Cooper	31.7%
	Forest	67.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Anson	Cooper	54.6%
	Forest	44.4%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Ashe	Cooper	31.5%
	Forest	67.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Avery	Cooper	25.6%
	Forest	73.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Beaufort	Cooper	39.2%
	Forest	59.9%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Bertie	Cooper	62.1%
	Forest	37.3%
		0.0%
	Other	0.6%

Bladen	Cooper	45.7%
	Forest	53.4%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Brunswick	Cooper	41.0%
	Forest	57.6%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Buncombe	Cooper	62.0%
	Forest	36.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.8%

Burke	Cooper	33.8%
	Forest	65.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Cabarrus	Cooper	47.0%
	Forest	51.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.7%

Caldwell	Cooper	27.9%
	Forest	70.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Camden	Cooper	27.1%
	Forest	71.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.9%

Carteret	Cooper	31.3%
	Forest	67.5%
		0.0%
	Other	1.3%

Caswell	Cooper	44.0%
	Forest	55.2%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Catawba	Cooper	34.0%
	Forest	64.6%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Chatham	Cooper	57.9%
	Forest	41.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Cherokee	Cooper	23.1%
	Forest	75.5%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Chowan	Cooper	43.8%
	Forest	55.5%
		0.0%
	Other	0.7%

Clay	Cooper	25.7%
	Forest	72.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Cleveland	Cooper	36.3%
	Forest	62.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Columbus	Cooper	39.3%
	Forest	59.9%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Craven	Cooper	42.4%
	Forest	56.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Cumberland	Cooper	60.3%
	Forest	37.7%
		0.0%
	Other	2.1%

Currituck	Cooper	27.3%
	Forest	70.5%
		0.0%
	Other	2.2%

Dare	Cooper	43.7%
	Forest	54.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Davidson	Cooper	30.1%
	Forest	68.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Davie	Cooper	31.3%
	Forest	67.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Duplin	Cooper	40.5%
	Forest	58.7%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Durham	Cooper	81.9%
	Forest	16.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Edgecombe	Cooper	66.0%
	Forest	33.3%
		0.0%
	Other	0.7%

Forsyth	Cooper	59.2%
	Forest	39.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Franklin	Cooper	46.7%
	Forest	51.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Gaston	Cooper	38.4%
	Forest	60.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Gates	Cooper	45.2%
	Forest	53.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Graham	Cooper	23.8%
	Forest	75.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Granville	Cooper	49.9%
	Forest	48.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Greene	Cooper	45.7%
	Forest	53.6%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Guilford	Cooper	63.8%
	Forest	34.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Halifax	Cooper	62.6%
	Forest	36.6%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Harnett	Cooper	41.3%
	Forest	56.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.8%

Haywood	Cooper	40.5%
	Forest	58.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Henderson	Cooper	42.7%
	Forest	55.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Hertford	Cooper	68.2%
	Forest	31.1%
		0.0%
	Other	0.7%

Hoke	Cooper	58.5%
	Forest	39.4%
		0.0%
	Other	2.1%

Hyde	Cooper	44.7%
	Forest	54.4%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Iredell	Cooper	35.7%
	Forest	62.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Jackson	Cooper	48.7%
	Forest	49.3%
		0.0%
	Other	2.0%

Johnston	Cooper	40.7%
	Forest	57.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Jones	Cooper	42.3%
	Forest	56.7%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Lee	Cooper	46.9%
	Forest	51.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Lenoir	Cooper	50.1%
	Forest	49.1%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Lincoln	Cooper	29.4%
	Forest	69.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.3%

McDowell	Cooper	29.9%
	Forest	68.8%
		0.0%
	Other	1.3%

Macon	Cooper	34.1%
	Forest	64.5%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Madison	Cooper	42.1%
	Forest	56.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Martin	Cooper	50.2%
	Forest	49.2%
		0.0%
	Other	0.7%

Mecklenburg	Cooper	67.8%
	Forest	30.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.9%

Mitchell	Cooper	23.2%
	Forest	75.8%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Montgomery	Cooper	39.5%
	Forest	59.4%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Moore	Cooper	39.5%
	Forest	59.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Nash	Cooper	53.1%
	Forest	46.1%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

New Hanover	Cooper	53.0%
	Forest	45.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.8%

Northampton	Cooper	62.6%
	Forest	36.6%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Onslow	Cooper	35.9%
	Forest	61.3%
		0.0%
	Other	2.8%

Orange	Cooper	76.7%
	Forest	22.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Pamlico	Cooper	37.8%
	Forest	61.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Pasquotank	Cooper	50.8%
	Forest	47.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Pender	Cooper	37.1%
	Forest	61.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Perquimans	Cooper	35.3%
	Forest	63.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Person	Cooper	42.6%
	Forest	56.4%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Pitt	Cooper	56.1%
	Forest	42.6%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Polk	Cooper	39.5%
	Forest	59.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.3%

Randolph	Cooper	26.0%
	Forest	72.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Richmond	Cooper	46.6%
	Forest	52.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.3%

Robeson	Cooper	47.8%
	Forest	51.3%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Rockingham	Cooper	38.2%
	Forest	60.6%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Rowan	Cooper	34.8%
	Forest	63.7%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Rutherford	Cooper	30.5%
	Forest	68.4%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Sampson	Cooper	41.7%
	Forest	57.5%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Scotland	Cooper	52.4%
	Forest	46.6%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Stanly	Cooper	27.8%
	Forest	71.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Stokes	Cooper	25.6%
	Forest	73.4%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Surry	Cooper	29.7%
	Forest	69.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Swain	Cooper	43.3%
	Forest	54.7%
		0.0%
	Other	2.0%

Transylvania	Cooper	45.4%
	Forest	53.1%
		0.0%
	Other	1.5%

Tyrrell	Cooper	45.0%
	Forest	54.1%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Union	Cooper	39.3%
	Forest	59.3%
		0.0%
	Other	1.4%

Vance	Cooper	62.8%
	Forest	36.3%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Wake	Cooper	65.2%
	Forest	33.2%
		0.0%
	Other	1.6%

Warren	Cooper	65.2%
	Forest	34.0%
		0.0%
	Other	0.8%

Washington	Cooper	57.0%
	Forest	42.4%
		0.0%
	Other	0.6%

Watauga	Cooper	55.1%
	Forest	43.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.9%

Wayne	Cooper	46.3%
	Forest	52.5%
		0.0%
	Other	1.2%

Wilkes	Cooper	27.0%
	Forest	72.0%
		0.0%
	Other	1.0%

Wilson	Cooper	54.1%
	Forest	45.0%
		0.0%
	Other	0.9%

Yadkin	Cooper	24.0%
	Forest	74.9%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

Yancey	Cooper	36.5%
	Forest	62.5%
		0.0%
	Other	1.1%

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

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