- Lead
- 47,076
- Total
- 103,491
- vs nation
- R+44.0
- Turnout
- 74.9%
Comal County, TX
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 74.9% of 138,917 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 37,914
- Total
- 88,892
- vs nation
- R+47.1
- Turnout
- 80.8%
- Lead
- 30,898
- Total
- 62,178
- vs nation
- R+51.8
- Turnout
- 68.8%
- Lead
- 27,868
- Total
- 51,529
- vs nation
- R+57.9
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 22,849
- Total
- 48,158
- vs nation
- R+54.7
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 22,421
- Total
- 41,043
- vs nation
- R+52.2
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 17,468
- Total
- 32,748
- vs nation
- R+53.9
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 9,631
- Total
- 26,057
- vs nation
- R+45.5
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+45.5MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 183,8262024 5-year
- Median household income
- $101,8892024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 64.0%2024 5-year
- Black
- 2.4%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 28.4%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+84.7 in 1932MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+57.2 in 1972MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Kendall County, TX · twin score 95.9
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
- 74.9%104,044 participants ÷ 138,917 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +20.1 ptsPresidential-dependent
- Drop-off versus state
- +1.0 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 54.8%–61.7%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 62,909 | 91,436 | 68.8% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 62,296 | 99,609 | 62.5% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 90,110 | 111,551 | 80.8% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 75,441 | 124,353 | 60.7% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 104,044 | 138,917 | 74.9% | 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
40 precincts · 103,491 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Precinct 206Precinct 206 | 1,418 | 3,689 | 45 | 5,152 | 27.5% | 71.6% | R+44.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Precinct 103Precinct 103 | 1,047 | 3,459 | 48 | 4,554 | 23.0% | 76.0% | R+53.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 205Precinct 205 | 1,311 | 2,795 | 51 | 4,157 | 31.5% | 67.2% | R+35.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 204Precinct 204 | 964 | 3,091 | 28 | 4,083 | 23.6% | 75.7% | R+52.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 404Precinct 404 | 996 | 3,003 | 57 | 4,056 | 24.6% | 74.0% | R+49.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 203Precinct 203 | 1,075 | 2,867 | 34 | 3,976 | 27.0% | 72.1% | R+45.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 403Precinct 403 | 913 | 3,015 | 22 | 3,950 | 23.1% | 76.3% | R+53.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 107Precinct 107 | 1,021 | 2,865 | 34 | 3,920 | 26.0% | 73.1% | R+47.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 102Precinct 102 | 770 | 3,001 | 27 | 3,798 | 20.3% | 79.0% | R+58.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 208APrecinct 208A | 795 | 2,936 | 35 | 3,766 | 21.1% | 78.0% | R+56.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 305Precinct 305 | 1,099 | 2,545 | 43 | 3,687 | 29.8% | 69.0% | R+39.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 408Precinct 408 | 845 | 2,776 | 31 | 3,652 | 23.1% | 76.0% | R+52.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 402Precinct 402 | 866 | 2,602 | 37 | 3,505 | 24.7% | 74.2% | R+49.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 201Precinct 201 | 1,079 | 2,342 | 44 | 3,465 | 31.1% | 67.6% | R+36.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 405APrecinct 405A | 713 | 2,703 | 23 | 3,439 | 20.7% | 78.6% | R+57.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 407Precinct 407 | 772 | 2,591 | 35 | 3,398 | 22.7% | 76.3% | R+53.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 406Precinct 406 | 916 | 2,282 | 39 | 3,237 | 28.3% | 70.5% | R+42.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 105Precinct 105 | 723 | 2,389 | 32 | 3,144 | 23.0% | 76.0% | R+53.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 109APrecinct 109A | 663 | 2,396 | 23 | 3,082 | 21.5% | 77.7% | R+56.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 106Precinct 106 | 631 | 2,331 | 30 | 2,992 | 21.1% | 77.9% | R+56.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 101Precinct 101 | 989 | 1,940 | 51 | 2,980 | 33.2% | 65.1% | R+31.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 306Precinct 306 | 981 | 1,826 | 32 | 2,839 | 34.6% | 64.3% | R+29.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 301APrecinct 301A | 1,191 | 1,538 | 35 | 2,764 | 43.1% | 55.6% | R+12.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 207Precinct 207 | 557 | 1,942 | 23 | 2,522 | 22.1% | 77.0% | R+54.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 401Precinct 401 | 760 | 1,696 | 32 | 2,488 | 30.5% | 68.2% | R+37.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 304Precinct 304 | 853 | 1,602 | 27 | 2,482 | 34.4% | 64.5% | R+30.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 110Precinct 110 | 510 | 1,651 | 13 | 2,174 | 23.5% | 75.9% | R+52.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 308Precinct 308 | 707 | 1,106 | 21 | 1,834 | 38.5% | 60.3% | R+21.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 104Precinct 104 | 389 | 1,285 | 16 | 1,690 | 23.0% | 76.0% | R+53.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 202APrecinct 202A | 527 | 1,120 | 19 | 1,666 | 31.6% | 67.2% | R+35.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 108Precinct 108 | 398 | 1,241 | 24 | 1,663 | 23.9% | 74.6% | R+50.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 302Precinct 302 | 489 | 1,114 | 21 | 1,624 | 30.1% | 68.6% | R+38.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 307Precinct 307 | 359 | 524 | 14 | 897 | 40.0% | 58.4% | R+18.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 303Precinct 303 | 303 | 300 | 9 | 612 | 49.5% | 49.0% | D+0.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 208DPrecinct 208D | 22 | 84 | 0 | 106 | 20.8% | 79.2% | R+58.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 208BPrecinct 208B | 13 | 47 | 0 | 60 | 21.7% | 78.3% | R+56.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 109BPrecinct 109B | 8 | 30 | 0 | 38 | 21.1% | 78.9% | R+57.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 405CPrecinct 405C | 3 | 13 | 0 | 16 | 18.8% | 81.3% | R+62.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 208CPrecinct 208C | 3 | 11 | 0 | 14 | 21.4% | 78.6% | R+57.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 405BPrecinct 405B | 1 | 8 | 0 | 9 | 11.1% | 88.9% | R+77.8 |
Presidential margin, 1904–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1904 | +55.8% |
| 1908 | +10.4% |
| 1912 | +46.1% |
| 1916 | −25.6% |
| 1920 | −32.1% |
| 1924 | +0.7% |
| 1928 | +57.6% |
| 1932 | +84.7% |
| 1936 | +48.7% |
| 1940 | −37.0% |
| 1944 | −41.3% |
| 1948 | −17.6% |
| 1952 | −45.5% |
| 1956 | −49.5% |
| 1960 | −25.0% |
| 1964 | +24.2% |
| 1968 | −19.5% |
| 1972 | −57.2% |
| 1976 | −21.9% |
| 1980 | −45.2% |
| 1984 | −52.4% |
| 1988 | −41.4% |
| 1992 | −25.4% |
| 1996 | −37.0% |
| 2000 | −53.3% |
| 2004 | −54.6% |
| 2008 | −47.4% |
| 2012 | −54.1% |
| 2016 | −49.7% |
| 2020 | −42.7% |
| 2024 | −45.5% |
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 | 92,389 |
| 2018 | 100,074 |
| 2020 | 115,876 |
| 2022 | 130,109 |
| 2024 | 143,696 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+7,427 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +86,462 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $103,470 in average income, against $121,927 for residents who stayed — 15% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+0.5 on average — 45 points more Democratic-leaning than Comal County, TX itself (R+45.5).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Bexar County, TX2,513D+9.7
- Guadalupe County, TX1,108R+29.5
- Hays County, TX701D+5.6
- Travis County, TX499D+39.3
- Harris County, TX381D+5.5
- Williamson County, TX200R+2.4
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Bexar County, TX1,461
- Guadalupe County, TX1,276
- Hays County, TX425
- Travis County, TX340
- Harris County, TX156
- Williamson County, TX122
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 | +2,468 |
| 2012 | +2,349 |
| 2013 | +3,290 |
| 2014 | +3,960 |
| 2015 | +4,835 |
| 2016 | +4,921 |
| 2017 | +5,964 |
| 2018 | +7,091 |
| 2019 | +7,600 |
| 2021 | +12,096 |
| 2022 | +9,009 |
| 2023 | +8,530 |
| 2024 | +6,922 |
| 2025 | +7,427 |
Comal County, anchored by New Braunfels north of San Antonio, has absorbed rapid population growth from the metro's sprawl while maintaining some of the widest Republican presidential margins in the state, hitting R+45.5 in 2024.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 84.7 points in 1932 and a Republican high of 57.2 points in 1972. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 2.8 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 45.5 points.
A population of 183,826, a 64% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $101,889 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Kendall County and Montgomery 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 →
Comal County, Texas. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/48091/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.