HarrisDemocratic36.8%33,844TrumpRepublican61.6%56,671OliverLibertarian0.9%796
R+24.8- Lead
- 22,827
- Total
- 91,961
- vs nation
- R+23.4
- Turnout
- 53.0%
Akashiccounty
Brazos County, TX
Office (updates table and map)
President margin by year
Place winner margin
Boundary by 2024 margin · Precinct returns · VEST · MIT Election Lab
President results by year
2024 turnout 53.0% of 174,677 citizens 18+
BidenDemocratic41.4%35,349TrumpRepublican55.7%47,530JorgensenLibertarian2.1%1,812
R+14.3- Lead
- 12,181
- Total
- 85,313
- vs nation
- R+18.7
- Turnout
- 52.7%
ClintonDemocratic34.4%23,121TrumpRepublican57.6%38,738JohnsonLibertarian5.7%3,813
R+23.2- Lead
- 15,617
- Total
- 67,211
- vs nation
- R+25.3
- Turnout
- 46.5%
ObamaDemocratic31.2%17,477RomneyRepublican66.5%37,209GrayLibertarian1.9%1,046
R+35.3- Lead
- 19,732
- Total
- 55,962
- vs nation
- R+39.1
- Turnout
- —
ObamaDemocratic34.9%20,502McCainRepublican63.9%37,465OtherAll other candidates1.2%706
R+28.9- Lead
- 16,963
- Total
- 58,673
- vs nation
- R+36.2
- Turnout
- —
KerryDemocratic29.7%16,128BushRepublican69.2%37,594OtherAll other candidates1.1%587
R+39.5- Lead
- 21,466
- Total
- 54,309
- vs nation
- R+37.1
- Turnout
- —
GoreDemocratic26.3%12,359BushRepublican70.0%32,864NaderGreen2.9%1,351
R+43.7- Lead
- 20,505
- Total
- 46,941
- vs nation
- R+44.2
- Turnout
- —
ClintonDemocratic36.1%13,968DoleRepublican57.1%22,082PerotReform5.7%2,215
R+21.0- Lead
- 8,114
- Total
- 38,644
- vs nation
- R+29.5
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+24.8MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 242,3112024 5-year
- Median household income
- $58,5532024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 53.0%2024 5-year
- Black
- 10.1%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 27.4%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+96.5 in 1936MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+47.4 in 1984MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Lubbock County, TX · twin score 83.2
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
- 53.0%92,620 participants ÷ 174,677 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +17.3 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off versus state
- -1.8 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 35.7%–42.1%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 68,448 | 147,179 | 46.5% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 64,877 | 154,376 | 42.0% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 85,061 | 161,330 | 52.7% | C/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 60,216 | 169,894 | 35.4% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 92,620 | 174,677 | 53.0% | 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 159, denominator source 157; top ticket votes; canonical-complete-contest-floor-v1; allocation share 0.0%; series 152/2.
- 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
95 precincts · 90,445 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Precinct 69Precinct 69 | 1,089 | 2,311 | 54 | 3,454 | 31.5% | 66.9% | R+35.4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Precinct 26Precinct 26 | 992 | 2,208 | 48 | 3,248 | 30.5% | 68.0% | R+37.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 64Precinct 64 | 906 | 2,239 | 36 | 3,181 | 28.5% | 70.4% | R+41.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 40Precinct 40 | 1,066 | 2,052 | 47 | 3,165 | 33.7% | 64.8% | R+31.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 10Precinct 10 | 1,073 | 1,952 | 64 | 3,089 | 34.7% | 63.2% | R+28.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 80Precinct 80 | 964 | 2,041 | 72 | 3,077 | 31.3% | 66.3% | R+35.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 12Precinct 12 | 1,152 | 1,867 | 56 | 3,075 | 37.5% | 60.7% | R+23.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 35Precinct 35 | 1,307 | 1,681 | 43 | 3,031 | 43.1% | 55.5% | R+12.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 36Precinct 36 | 1,138 | 1,679 | 39 | 2,856 | 39.8% | 58.8% | R+18.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 27Precinct 27 | 555 | 2,218 | 41 | 2,814 | 19.7% | 78.8% | R+59.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 73Precinct 73 | 671 | 1,918 | 38 | 2,627 | 25.5% | 73.0% | R+47.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 88Precinct 88 | 788 | 1,470 | 32 | 2,290 | 34.4% | 64.2% | R+29.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 63Precinct 63 | 619 | 1,593 | 25 | 2,237 | 27.7% | 71.2% | R+43.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 76Precinct 76 | 906 | 1,282 | 44 | 2,232 | 40.6% | 57.4% | R+16.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 31Precinct 31 | 934 | 1,194 | 41 | 2,169 | 43.1% | 55.0% | R+12.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 20Precinct 20 | 1,191 | 870 | 46 | 2,107 | 56.5% | 41.3% | D+15.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 17Precinct 17 | 956 | 940 | 34 | 1,930 | 49.5% | 48.7% | D+0.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 1Precinct 1 | 378 | 1,472 | 21 | 1,871 | 20.2% | 78.7% | R+58.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 2Precinct 2 | 524 | 1,309 | 21 | 1,854 | 28.3% | 70.6% | R+42.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 55Precinct 55 | 914 | 889 | 33 | 1,836 | 49.8% | 48.4% | D+1.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 41Precinct 41 | 488 | 1,214 | 28 | 1,730 | 28.2% | 70.2% | R+42.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 14Precinct 14 | 940 | 691 | 17 | 1,648 | 57.0% | 41.9% | D+15.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 15Precinct 15 | 583 | 1,014 | 24 | 1,621 | 36.0% | 62.6% | R+26.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 75Precinct 75 | 721 | 856 | 24 | 1,601 | 45.0% | 53.5% | R+8.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 100Precinct 100 | 466 | 1,027 | 28 | 1,521 | 30.6% | 67.5% | R+36.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 30Precinct 30 | 706 | 791 | 21 | 1,518 | 46.5% | 52.1% | R+5.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 5Precinct 5 | 244 | 1,259 | 7 | 1,510 | 16.2% | 83.4% | R+67.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 13Precinct 13 | 551 | 878 | 30 | 1,459 | 37.8% | 60.2% | R+22.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 24Precinct 24 | 621 | 762 | 16 | 1,399 | 44.4% | 54.5% | R+10.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 39Precinct 39 | 477 | 754 | 21 | 1,252 | 38.1% | 60.2% | R+22.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 34Precinct 34 | 606 | 585 | 27 | 1,218 | 49.8% | 48.0% | D+1.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 11Precinct 11 | 637 | 539 | 37 | 1,213 | 52.5% | 44.4% | D+8.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 8Precinct 8 | 517 | 538 | 31 | 1,086 | 47.6% | 49.5% | R+1.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 7Precinct 7 | 168 | 853 | 6 | 1,027 | 16.4% | 83.1% | R+66.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 21Precinct 21 | 619 | 366 | 29 | 1,014 | 61.0% | 36.1% | D+25.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 28Precinct 28 | 223 | 731 | 12 | 966 | 23.1% | 75.7% | R+52.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 6Precinct 6 | 139 | 775 | 7 | 921 | 15.1% | 84.1% | R+69.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 9Precinct 9 | 315 | 534 | 12 | 861 | 36.6% | 62.0% | R+25.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 33Precinct 33 | 457 | 366 | 14 | 837 | 54.6% | 43.7% | D+10.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 74Precinct 74 | 455 | 343 | 16 | 814 | 55.9% | 42.1% | D+13.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 4Precinct 4 | 587 | 204 | 7 | 798 | 73.6% | 25.6% | D+48.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 66Precinct 66 | 312 | 471 | 6 | 789 | 39.5% | 59.7% | R+20.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 62Precinct 62 | 337 | 363 | 15 | 715 | 47.1% | 50.8% | R+3.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 103Precinct 103 | 108 | 592 | 9 | 709 | 15.2% | 83.5% | R+68.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 58Precinct 58 | 296 | 392 | 8 | 696 | 42.5% | 56.3% | R+13.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 3Precinct 3 | 227 | 457 | 9 | 693 | 32.8% | 65.9% | R+33.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 29Precinct 29 | 201 | 432 | 9 | 642 | 31.3% | 67.3% | R+36.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 16Precinct 16 | 363 | 254 | 6 | 623 | 58.3% | 40.8% | D+17.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 25Precinct 25 | 383 | 159 | 6 | 548 | 69.9% | 29.0% | D+40.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 54Precinct 54 | 106 | 431 | 7 | 544 | 19.5% | 79.2% | R+59.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 32Precinct 32 | 192 | 255 | 8 | 455 | 42.2% | 56.0% | R+13.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 38Precinct 38 | 198 | 224 | 5 | 427 | 46.4% | 52.5% | R+6.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 102Precinct 102 | 117 | 222 | 9 | 348 | 33.6% | 63.8% | R+30.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 107Precinct 107 | 83 | 256 | 9 | 348 | 23.9% | 73.6% | R+49.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 47Precinct 47 | 127 | 185 | 3 | 315 | 40.3% | 58.7% | R+18.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 19Precinct 19 | 137 | 171 | 5 | 313 | 43.8% | 54.6% | R+10.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 77Precinct 77 | 102 | 203 | 2 | 307 | 33.2% | 66.1% | R+32.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 82Precinct 82 | 68 | 234 | 4 | 306 | 22.2% | 76.5% | R+54.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 43Precinct 43 | 117 | 182 | 5 | 304 | 38.5% | 59.9% | R+21.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 46Precinct 46 | 112 | 173 | 2 | 287 | 39.0% | 60.3% | R+21.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 18Precinct 18 | 198 | 74 | 3 | 275 | 72.0% | 26.9% | D+45.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 48Precinct 48 | 40 | 160 | 1 | 201 | 19.9% | 79.6% | R+59.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 65Precinct 65 | 40 | 151 | 0 | 191 | 20.9% | 79.1% | R+58.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 22Precinct 22 | 81 | 94 | 1 | 176 | 46.0% | 53.4% | R+7.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 67Precinct 67 | 48 | 121 | 4 | 173 | 27.7% | 69.9% | R+42.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 78Precinct 78 | 34 | 135 | 1 | 170 | 20.0% | 79.4% | R+59.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 49Precinct 49 | 93 | 62 | 2 | 157 | 59.2% | 39.5% | D+19.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 106Precinct 106 | 92 | 61 | 2 | 155 | 59.4% | 39.4% | D+20.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 37Precinct 37 | 16 | 115 | 1 | 132 | 12.1% | 87.1% | R+75.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 57Precinct 57 | 71 | 49 | 4 | 124 | 57.3% | 39.5% | D+17.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 56Precinct 56 | 33 | 89 | 0 | 122 | 27.0% | 73.0% | R+45.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 44Precinct 44 | 24 | 95 | 0 | 119 | 20.2% | 79.8% | R+59.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 45Precinct 45 | 27 | 82 | 1 | 110 | 24.5% | 74.5% | R+50.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 71Precinct 71 | 25 | 82 | 3 | 110 | 22.7% | 74.5% | R+51.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 53Precinct 53 | 46 | 59 | 2 | 107 | 43.0% | 55.1% | R+12.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 72Precinct 72 | 50 | 53 | 2 | 105 | 47.6% | 50.5% | R+2.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 60Precinct 60 | 4 | 83 | 1 | 88 | 4.5% | 94.3% | R+89.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 23Precinct 23 | 8 | 67 | 1 | 76 | 10.5% | 88.2% | R+77.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 81Precinct 81 | 15 | 46 | 2 | 63 | 23.8% | 73.0% | R+49.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 79Precinct 79 | 27 | 32 | 1 | 60 | 45.0% | 53.3% | R+8.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 105Precinct 105 | 13 | 38 | 0 | 51 | 25.5% | 74.5% | R+49.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 61Precinct 61 | 13 | 37 | 1 | 51 | 25.5% | 72.5% | R+47.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 59Precinct 59 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 23 | 13.0% | 87.0% | R+73.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 101Precinct 101 | 5 | 15 | 0 | 20 | 25.0% | 75.0% | R+50.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 90Precinct 90 | 7 | 12 | 1 | 20 | 35.0% | 60.0% | R+25.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 83Precinct 83 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 12 | 16.7% | 83.3% | R+66.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 52Precinct 52 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 8 | 0.0% | 87.5% | R+87.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 89APrecinct 89A | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 50.0% | 50.0% | Exact tie |
| Precinct -Precinct 91APrecinct 91A | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 85Precinct 85 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 50Precinct 50 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 84Precinct 84 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 91BPrecinct 91B | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 98Precinct 98 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 96Precinct 96 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
presidential history
Presidential margin, 1908–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1908 | +72.4% |
| 1912 | +64.5% |
| 1916 | +57.6% |
| 1920 | +46.2% |
| 1924 | +76.6% |
| 1928 | +33.4% |
| 1932 | +85.4% |
| 1936 | +96.5% |
| 1940 | +74.0% |
| 1944 | +66.1% |
| 1948 | +34.8% |
| 1952 | −5.3% |
| 1956 | −17.5% |
| 1960 | +12.9% |
| 1964 | +33.2% |
| 1968 | −3.5% |
| 1972 | −42.6% |
| 1976 | −18.9% |
| 1980 | −26.9% |
| 1984 | −47.4% |
| 1988 | −32.4% |
| 1992 | −18.5% |
| 1996 | −21.0% |
| 2000 | −43.7% |
| 2004 | −39.5% |
| 2008 | −28.9% |
| 2012 | −35.3% |
| 2016 | −23.2% |
| 2020 | −14.3% |
| 2024 | −24.8% |
DemocraticRepublican
Federal and statewide elections · 3 House · 37 Senate · 4 Senate special · 12 governor
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.
voter registration
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
Registered voters
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 106,821 |
| 2018 | 114,391 |
| 2020 | 122,137 |
| 2022 | 126,123 |
| 2024 | 133,384 |
domestic migration
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−2,322 net domestic migration · 2025
20112025
Net +6,340 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $62,973 in average income, against $91,247 for residents who stayed — 31% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+15.3 on average — 9.6 points more Democratic-leaning than Brazos County, TX itself (R+24.8).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Harris County, TX778D+5.5
- Montgomery County, TX263R+45.5
- Travis County, TX259D+39.3
- Bexar County, TX206D+9.7
- Burleson County, TX196R+62.8
- Williamson County, TX194R+2.4
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Harris County, TX958
- Travis County, TX412
- Dallas County, TX293
- Montgomery County, TX275
- Grimes County, TX261
- Tarrant County, TX232
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 | −1,130 |
| 2012 | −189 |
| 2013 | +871 |
| 2014 | +1,362 |
| 2015 | +3,771 |
| 2016 | +176 |
| 2017 | +1,018 |
| 2018 | −734 |
| 2019 | +931 |
| 2021 | +1,337 |
| 2022 | +2,137 |
| 2023 | +1,060 |
| 2024 | −1,948 |
| 2025 | −2,322 |
Home to Texas A&M University, Brazos County blends a large student and academic population with a conservative-leaning permanent electorate that has consistently returned Republican presidential margins above 20 points.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 96.5 points in 1936 and a Republican high of 47.4 points in 1984. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 10.5 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 24.8 points.
A population of 242,311, a 53% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $58,553 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Lubbock County and McLennan County.
Political twins — counties
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Lubbock County
Texas
83.2twin score
2000 margin12-yr trendmedian age≠ % Asian
McLennan County
Texas
82.6twin score
population scale% Latino% White≠ college share
Sedgwick County
Kansas
79.1twin score
12-yr trendpopulation scale2020 margin≠ 2000 margin
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 →
Cite this page
All citations released under CC BY 4.0. Attribution: Akashic Intelligence.
Brazos County, Texas. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/48041/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.
License: CC BY 4.0
Embed this page
A live widget for your site — no API key, attribution built in, CC BY 4.0. All widgets & sizes →
Cities & towns in Brazos County
Texas at the ballot boxAll elections →
Frequently asked questions
How did Brazos County, Texas vote in 2024?
In 2024, Brazos County, Texas voted Republican by 24.8 points (R+24.8), carried by the Republican candidate. Out of 91,961 votes cast, 33,844 went Democratic and 56,671 went Republican.
When did Brazos County, Texas last vote Democratic?
The most recent presidential election in which Brazos County, Texas voted Democratic was 1964.
How many people live in Brazos County, Texas?
Brazos County, Texas has a population of 242,311 according to the 2024 American Community Survey 5-year estimates from the US Census Bureau.
What is the median household income in Brazos County, Texas?
Median household income in Brazos County, Texas is $58,553 — below the national median of $80,734. The Texas state median is $78,476.
What is the political history of Brazos County, Texas?
Akashic tracks 38 presidential elections in Brazos County, Texas from 1876 to 2024. Of those, 13 went Democratic and 17 went Republican.