- Lead
- 1,079
- Total
- 3,543
- vs nation
- R+29.0
- Turnout
- 76.9%
Grant County, MN
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 76.9% of 4,659 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 969
- Total
- 3,654
- vs nation
- R+31.0
- Turnout
- 80.6%
- Lead
- 958
- Total
- 3,473
- vs nation
- R+29.7
- Turnout
- 76.2%
- Lead
- 101
- Total
- 3,487
- vs nation
- R+6.8
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 204
- Total
- 3,605
- vs nation
- R+1.6
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 37
- Total
- 3,819
- vs nation
- D+1.5
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 297
- Total
- 3,624
- vs nation
- R+8.7
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 522
- Total
- 3,562
- vs nation
- D+6.1
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+30.5MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 6,1272024 5-year
- Median household income
- $73,9172024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 92.1%2024 5-year
- Black
- 0.6%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 2.7%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+39.5 in 1932MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+80.3 in 1904MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Yellow Medicine County, MN · twin score 92.5
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
- 76.9%3,583 participants ÷ 4,659 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +16.7 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off versus state
- -3.2 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 60.2%–65.5%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 3,517 | 4,618 | 76.2% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 3,198 | 4,565 | 70.1% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 3,674 | 4,561 | 80.6% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 2,973 | 4,658 | 63.8% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 3,583 | 4,659 | 76.9% | 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 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 306/183.
- 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
46 precincts · 3,543 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -ELBOW LAKEELBOW LAKE | 229 | 401 | 17 | 647 | 35.4% | 62.0% | R+26.6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -PELICAN LAKE TWPPELICAN LAKE TWP | 121 | 208 | 7 | 336 | 36.0% | 61.9% | R+25.9 |
| Precinct -HOFFMANHOFFMAN | 108 | 221 | 6 | 335 | 32.2% | 66.0% | R+33.7 |
| Precinct -ERDAHL TWPERDAHL TWP | 111 | 160 | 8 | 279 | 39.8% | 57.3% | R+17.6 |
| Precinct -ASHBYASHBY | 103 | 126 | 4 | 233 | 44.2% | 54.1% | R+9.9 |
| Precinct -ELK LAKE TWPELK LAKE TWP | 60 | 163 | 2 | 225 | 26.7% | 72.4% | R+45.8 |
| Precinct -HERMANHERMAN | 83 | 126 | 6 | 215 | 38.6% | 58.6% | R+20.0 |
| Precinct -BARRETTBARRETT | 57 | 126 | 7 | 190 | 30.0% | 66.3% | R+36.3 |
| Precinct -LAND TWPLAND TWP | 37 | 109 | 3 | 149 | 24.8% | 73.2% | R+48.3 |
| Precinct -SANFORD TWPSANFORD TWP | 32 | 61 | 8 | 101 | 31.7% | 60.4% | R+28.7 |
| Precinct -STONY BROOK TWPSTONY BROOK TWP | 31 | 59 | 6 | 96 | 32.3% | 61.5% | R+29.2 |
| Precinct -ELBOW LAKE TWPELBOW LAKE TWP | 17 | 73 | 1 | 91 | 18.7% | 80.2% | R+61.5 |
| Precinct -POMME DE TERRE TWPPOMME DE TERRE TWP | 13 | 75 | 3 | 91 | 14.3% | 82.4% | R+68.1 |
| Precinct -LIEN TWPLIEN TWP | 27 | 55 | 2 | 84 | 32.1% | 65.5% | R+33.3 |
| Precinct -WENDELLWENDELL | 27 | 50 | 2 | 79 | 34.2% | 63.3% | R+29.1 |
| Precinct -MACSVILLE TWPMACSVILLE TWP | 33 | 35 | 1 | 69 | 47.8% | 50.7% | R+2.9 |
| Precinct -ROSEVILLE TWPROSEVILLE TWP | 18 | 48 | 2 | 68 | 26.5% | 70.6% | R+44.1 |
| Precinct -DELAWARE TWPDELAWARE TWP | 28 | 30 | 2 | 60 | 46.7% | 50.0% | R+3.3 |
| Precinct -LAWRENCE TWPLAWRENCE TWP | 8 | 46 | 0 | 54 | 14.8% | 85.2% | R+70.4 |
| Precinct -GORTON TWPGORTON TWP | 14 | 24 | 2 | 40 | 35.0% | 60.0% | R+25.0 |
| Precinct -LOGAN TWPLOGAN TWP | 13 | 25 | 0 | 38 | 34.2% | 65.8% | R+31.6 |
| Precinct -NORCROSSNORCROSS | 9 | 24 | 0 | 33 | 27.3% | 72.7% | R+45.5 |
| Precinct -NORTH OTTAWA TWPNORTH OTTAWA TWP | 8 | 21 | 1 | 30 | 26.7% | 70.0% | R+43.3 |
| Ashby Voting District27_270510005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Barrett Voting District27_270510010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Delaware Twp. Voting District27_270510015 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Elbow Lake Twp. Voting District27_270510025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Elbow Lake Voting District27_270510020 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Elk Lake Twp. Voting District27_270510030 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Erdahl Twp. Voting District27_270510035 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Gorton Twp. Voting District27_270510040 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Herman Voting District27_270510045 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Hoffman Voting District27_270510050 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Land Twp. Voting District27_270510055 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Lawrence Twp. Voting District27_270510060 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Lien Twp. Voting District27_270510065 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Logan Twp. Voting District27_270510070 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Macsville Twp. Voting District27_270510075 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Norcross Voting District27_270510080 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| North Ottawa Twp. Voting District27_270510085 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Pelican Lake Twp. Voting District27_270510090 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Pomme De Terre Twp. Voting District27_270510095 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Roseville Twp. Voting District27_270510100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Sanford Twp. Voting District27_270510105 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Stony Brook Twp. Voting District27_270510110 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Wendell Voting District27_270510115 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −32.6% |
| 1896 | −14.8% |
| 1900 | −37.5% |
| 1904 | −80.3% |
| 1908 | −46.1% |
| 1912 | +15.1% |
| 1916 | −5.6% |
| 1920 | −59.2% |
| 1924 | −45.7% |
| 1928 | −9.8% |
| 1932 | +39.5% |
| 1936 | +19.4% |
| 1940 | −3.2% |
| 1944 | +1.8% |
| 1948 | +13.4% |
| 1952 | −19.5% |
| 1956 | +1.0% |
| 1960 | +2.1% |
| 1964 | +20.5% |
| 1968 | +1.3% |
| 1972 | +4.6% |
| 1976 | +22.8% |
| 1980 | −5.4% |
| 1984 | −6.1% |
| 1988 | +7.0% |
| 1992 | +9.8% |
| 1996 | +14.7% |
| 2000 | −8.2% |
| 2004 | −1.0% |
| 2008 | +5.7% |
| 2012 | −2.9% |
| 2016 | −27.6% |
| 2020 | −26.5% |
| 2024 | −30.5% |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 4,025 |
| 2018 | 3,937 |
| 2020 | 4,130 |
| 2022 | 3,993 |
| 2024 | 4,096 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−52 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −1 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $50,367 in average income, against $78,012 for residents who stayed — 35% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+34.6 on average — 4.1 points more Republican-leaning than Grant County, MN itself (R+30.5).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Douglas County, MN35R+35.0
- Otter Tail County, MN34R+34.1
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Douglas County, MN59
- Otter Tail County, MN38
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 | 0 |
| 2012 | −63 |
| 2013 | +40 |
| 2014 | −39 |
| 2015 | −70 |
| 2016 | +67 |
| 2017 | +2 |
| 2018 | +69 |
| 2019 | −13 |
| 2021 | +78 |
| 2022 | −15 |
| 2023 | +24 |
| 2024 | −29 |
| 2025 | −52 |
Grant County's roughly 6,300 residents are spread across glacially flattened farmland in west-central Minnesota, producing consistently lopsided Republican margins in statewide and federal races that have widened over the past decade.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 39.5 points in 1932 and a Republican high of 80.3 points in 1904. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 3.9 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 30.5 points.
A population of 6,127, a 92% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $73,917 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Yellow Medicine County and Lac qui Parle 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 →
Grant County, Minnesota. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/27051/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.