- Lead
- 5,103
- Total
- 8,205
- vs nation
- R+60.7
- Turnout
- 49.7%
Logan County, AR
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 49.7% of 16,575 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 4,897
- Total
- 8,225
- vs nation
- R+64.0
- Turnout
- 48.9%
- Lead
- 4,031
- Total
- 7,656
- vs nation
- R+54.7
- Turnout
- 47.6%
- Lead
- 3,070
- Total
- 7,331
- vs nation
- R+45.7
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 3,064
- Total
- 7,907
- vs nation
- R+46.0
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,715
- Total
- 8,551
- vs nation
- R+17.6
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,204
- Total
- 8,096
- vs nation
- R+15.4
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 866
- Total
- 8,002
- vs nation
- D+2.3
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+62.2MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 21,2772024 5-year
- Median household income
- $58,5552024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 88.2%2024 5-year
- Black
- 1.5%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 3.5%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+58.2 in 1932MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+62.2 in 2024MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- McNairy County, TN · twin score 97.3
Midterm durability
Total general-election participants divided by same-year citizen voting-age population. These are total ballots or participating voters—not presidential candidate votes.
- 2024 total turnout
- 49.7%8,234 participants ÷ 16,575 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +10.3 ptsPersistently low turnout
- Drop-off versus state
- -4.5 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 37.5%–39.4%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 7,996 | 16,797 | 47.6% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 5,582 | 16,650 | 33.5% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 8,225 | 16,803 | 48.9% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 6,442 | 16,647 | 38.7% | C/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 8,234 | 16,575 | 49.7% | A/A |
Sources and methods
- 2016: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 293/111.
- 2018: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 297/138.
- 2020: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 301/2.
- 2022: numerator source 159, denominator source 157; top ticket votes; canonical-complete-contest-floor-v1; allocation share 0.0%; series 154/183.
- 2024: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 311/228.
Precinct data
Results by precinct
36 precincts · 8,205 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -137 - Boone WD 4137 - Boone WD 4 | 100 | 588 | 17 | 705 | 14.2% | 83.4% | R+69.2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -117 - Sht Mtn WD 4117 - Sht Mtn WD 4 | 118 | 438 | 10 | 566 | 20.8% | 77.4% | R+56.5 |
| Precinct -114 - Sht Mtn WD 1114 - Sht Mtn WD 1 | 120 | 360 | 13 | 493 | 24.3% | 73.0% | R+48.7 |
| Precinct -136 - Boone WD 3136 - Boone WD 3 | 93 | 346 | 7 | 446 | 20.9% | 77.6% | R+56.7 |
| Precinct -115 - Sht Mtn WD 2115 - Sht Mtn WD 2 | 84 | 314 | 7 | 405 | 20.7% | 77.5% | R+56.8 |
| Precinct -135 - Boone WD 2135 - Boone WD 2 | 79 | 310 | 10 | 399 | 19.8% | 77.7% | R+57.9 |
| Precinct -113 - Shoal Creek113 - Shoal Creek | 68 | 277 | 7 | 352 | 19.3% | 78.7% | R+59.4 |
| Precinct -145 - Washburn145 - Washburn | 49 | 278 | 10 | 337 | 14.5% | 82.5% | R+68.0 |
| Precinct -134 - Boone WD 1134 - Boone WD 1 | 53 | 274 | 7 | 334 | 15.9% | 82.0% | R+66.2 |
| Precinct -106 - Ellsworth106 - Ellsworth | 37 | 270 | 6 | 313 | 11.8% | 86.3% | R+74.4 |
| Precinct -116 - Sht Mtn WD 3116 - Sht Mtn WD 3 | 63 | 209 | 6 | 278 | 22.7% | 75.2% | R+52.5 |
| Precinct -104 - Delaware104 - Delaware | 46 | 218 | 9 | 273 | 16.8% | 79.9% | R+63.0 |
| Precinct -141 - Reveille Rural141 - Reveille Rural | 42 | 218 | 7 | 267 | 15.7% | 81.6% | R+65.9 |
| Precinct -140 - Reveille City140 - Reveille City | 40 | 196 | 1 | 237 | 16.9% | 82.7% | R+65.8 |
| Precinct -100 - Cane Creek100 - Cane Creek | 41 | 176 | 5 | 222 | 18.5% | 79.3% | R+60.8 |
| Precinct -105 - Driggs105 - Driggs | 19 | 196 | 4 | 219 | 8.7% | 89.5% | R+80.8 |
| Precinct -144 - Sugar Creek144 - Sugar Creek | 22 | 182 | 3 | 207 | 10.6% | 87.9% | R+77.3 |
| Precinct -108 - Logan108 - Logan | 35 | 164 | 3 | 202 | 17.3% | 81.2% | R+63.9 |
| Precinct -119 - Caulksville Rural119 - Caulksville Rural | 29 | 150 | 8 | 187 | 15.5% | 80.2% | R+64.7 |
| Precinct -102 - Clark City102 - Clark City | 39 | 124 | 6 | 169 | 23.1% | 73.4% | R+50.3 |
| Precinct -146 - Barber146 - Barber | 19 | 144 | 1 | 164 | 11.6% | 87.8% | R+76.2 |
| Precinct -101 - Clark Crossroads101 - Clark Crossroads | 29 | 128 | 5 | 162 | 17.9% | 79.0% | R+61.1 |
| Precinct -111 - River Rural111 - River Rural | 46 | 92 | 7 | 145 | 31.7% | 63.4% | R+31.7 |
| Precinct -138 - Cauthron138 - Cauthron | 19 | 119 | 3 | 141 | 13.5% | 84.4% | R+70.9 |
| Precinct -147 - Tomlinson147 - Tomlinson | 19 | 110 | 1 | 130 | 14.6% | 84.6% | R+70.0 |
| Precinct -103 - Clark Rural103 - Clark Rural | 24 | 98 | 1 | 123 | 19.5% | 79.7% | R+60.2 |
| Precinct -139 - Petit Jean139 - Petit Jean | 18 | 90 | 2 | 110 | 16.4% | 81.8% | R+65.5 |
| Precinct -107 - Johnson107 - Johnson | 12 | 97 | 0 | 109 | 11.0% | 89.0% | R+78.0 |
| Precinct -118 - Caulksville City118 - Caulksville City | 17 | 85 | 3 | 105 | 16.2% | 81.0% | R+64.8 |
| Precinct -110 - River City110 - River City | 19 | 67 | 1 | 87 | 21.8% | 77.0% | R+55.2 |
| Precinct -109 - Mountain109 - Mountain | 11 | 63 | 0 | 74 | 14.9% | 85.1% | R+70.3 |
| Precinct -121 - Ratcliff Rural121 - Ratcliff Rural | 21 | 45 | 3 | 69 | 30.4% | 65.2% | R+34.8 |
| Precinct -120 - Ratcliff City120 - Ratcliff City | 14 | 54 | 0 | 68 | 20.6% | 79.4% | R+58.8 |
| Precinct -122 - Morrison Bluff122 - Morrison Bluff | 11 | 30 | 0 | 41 | 26.8% | 73.2% | R+46.3 |
| Precinct -132 - Blue Mountain City132 - Blue Mountain City | 4 | 33 | 1 | 38 | 10.5% | 86.8% | R+76.3 |
| Precinct -133 - Blue Mountain Rural133 - Blue Mountain Rural | 4 | 24 | 0 | 28 | 14.3% | 85.7% | R+71.4 |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | +19.6% |
| 1896 | +30.6% |
| 1900 | +29.2% |
| 1904 | +10.0% |
| 1908 | +19.0% |
| 1912 | +38.4% |
| 1916 | +26.1% |
| 1920 | −0.8% |
| 1924 | +17.8% |
| 1928 | +14.9% |
| 1932 | +58.2% |
| 1936 | +55.0% |
| 1940 | +45.3% |
| 1944 | +27.8% |
| 1948 | +38.5% |
| 1952 | +9.9% |
| 1956 | +5.1% |
| 1960 | +13.1% |
| 1964 | +22.7% |
| 1968 | −5.3% |
| 1972 | −43.3% |
| 1976 | +29.0% |
| 1980 | −4.6% |
| 1984 | −27.4% |
| 1988 | −27.1% |
| 1992 | +6.8% |
| 1996 | +10.8% |
| 2000 | −14.9% |
| 2004 | −20.1% |
| 2008 | −38.8% |
| 2012 | −41.9% |
| 2016 | −52.7% |
| 2020 | −59.5% |
| 2024 | −62.2% |
U.S. House
Each row shows U.S. House votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
U.S. Senate
Each row shows U.S. Senate votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
U.S. Senate special elections
Each row shows U.S. Senate special votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Governor
Each row shows Governor votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2018 | 12,288 |
| 2020 | 12,214 |
| 2022 | 13,088 |
| 2024 | 14,136 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+195 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +193 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $43,452 in average income, against $53,299 for residents who stayed — 18% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+49.5 on average — 13 points more Democratic-leaning than Logan County, AR itself (R+62.2).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Sebastian County, AR91R+37.5
- Franklin County, AR36R+62.4
- Johnson County, AR32R+51.4
- Yell County, AR27R+60.7
- Pope County, AR23R+52.2
- Crawford County, AR22R+58.2
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Sebastian County, AR99
- Franklin County, AR54
- Johnson County, AR35
- Pope County, AR33
- Crawford County, AR31
- Yell County, AR23
Migration is one input to a place’s political change, not its cause — a shift can also come from residents changing their minds, generational turnover, or turnout. These figures describe the places people moved between; they do not measure how any mover voted.
| Year | Net domestic migration |
|---|---|
| 2011 | −60 |
| 2012 | −353 |
| 2013 | +80 |
| 2014 | −132 |
| 2015 | −162 |
| 2016 | −18 |
| 2017 | −7 |
| 2018 | −19 |
| 2019 | −156 |
| 2021 | +218 |
| 2022 | +142 |
| 2023 | +234 |
| 2024 | +231 |
| 2025 | +195 |
Logan County, nestled in the Arkansas River Valley between the Ouachita and Ozark uplifts, recorded an R+62.2 presidential margin in 2024—among the widest in a state already dominated by Republican-leaning rural counties.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 58.2 points in 1932 and a Republican high of 62.2 points in 2024. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 2.7 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 62.2 points.
A population of 21,277, a 88% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $58,555 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of McNairy County and Independence County.
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Twin score (0–100) = weighted cosine between tier-standardized fingerprints: presidential margins 2000–2024 with 12-yr trend and elasticity, ACS income, age, education, population and race, top reported ancestries, and religious adherence — chips name the closest-shared dimensions and the widest gap. Re-weight the groups in the twins explorer.
Browse places by community — income, education, race & ethnicity, language — all community cuts →
Compare two places, side by side
Twelve curated comparisons line up election history, demographics, and the divergence story for two places at a glance. Browse all comparisons →
Logan County, Arkansas. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/05083/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.