# Party and place: report

Chapter 8.3 of The Public Mind, by Vishal Singh (NYU Stern). Generated from the chapter's data files; the reading version is at https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place. Table n of this report is figure n of the chapter.

## Identification

- Title: Party and place
- Chapter: 8.3 (Part VIII, Places and the people in them; Votes, giving and places)
- Question: How much do partisans' issue positions differ between deep-red and deep-blue counties, compared with the gap between parties?
- Dek: Across 12 policy issues in 2013 to 2021, Democrats and Republicans in the same kind of county differ by 43.1 points, and one party's members in deep-blue and deep-red counties differ by 5.6 points.
- Grain: individuals
- Status: draft
- Published: 2026-09-30
- Updated: not revised
- Data sources:
  - Cooperative Election Study. Cooperative Election Study cumulative common content, 2006-2021 policy items, party identification and county FIPS; years: 2006-2024 (every year; self-reported turnout is available in the 10 even years); weights: weight_cumulative
  - County election returns. County presidential returns 2004-2020 (repaired file), two-party margin; years: President 1868-2024 (40 elections); House and Senate 1990-2024; weights: none (full counts)
  - State presidential returns. State presidential returns 1976-2024, two-party margin; years: 1976-2024 (13 elections); weights: none (full counts)
  - ANES Cumulative Data File. ANES Time Series Cumulative Data File, waves 2012-2024, state identifier, issue items; years: 1948-2024 (33 study years; even years only after 2004; no 2006, 2010 or 2014 study); weights: weight (VCF0009z)
- Canonical URL: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place
- Report: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place/report
- Markdown: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place/report.md
- BibTeX key: singh2026partyandplace

```bibtex
@misc{singh2026partyandplace,
  author = {Singh, Vishal},
  title = {Party and place},
  year = {2026},
  url = {https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place},
  note = {In The Public Mind. Published 30 September 2026.}
}
```

## Principal estimates

The facts the dek and the opening prose cite, in order of appearance.

| Estimand | Population | Period | Value | Interval | n | Weights | Source | Fact id |
| --- | --- | --- | ---: | --- | ---: | --- | --- | --- |
| count of issues | the CES policy questions used in the chapter | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 12 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | n_issues |
| average over the issues of the party gap: Democratic minus Republican share taking the Democratic side, averaged over deep-red and deep-blue counties | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 43.1 | 95% CI 41.8 to 44.5 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study | party_gap_mean |
| average over the issues of the place gap: deep-blue minus deep-red county share taking the Democratic side, averaged over Democrats and Republicans | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 5.6 | 95% CI 4.7 to 6.6 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study | place_gap_mean |
| average party gap divided by average place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 7.6 | 95% CI 6.4 to 9.3 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study | ratio_means |
| count of issues | issues whose average place gap has an interval above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 12 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | n_place_avg_ci_pos |
| a county is deep red or deep blue at this margin or more | county classification | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 20 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | deep_cut |
| count of respondents | CES respondents interviewed in 2013 to 2021 with a matched county and a positive weight, in any party group or none | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 333,335 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | n_matched |
| count of respondents | CES respondents interviewed in 2013 to 2021 with a matched county, a positive weight and one of the five party groups | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 320,988 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | n_pool |
| number of resampling clusters | states and the District of Columbia with matched respondents, Alaska excluded | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 50 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | n_states |
| bootstrap replicates | cluster bootstrap | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 2,000 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | boot_reps |
| definition of the scale | the top of the scale on which every issue is coded, where 100 is the side that Democrats take more often | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 100 |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study | scale_max |

## Findings

Among Democrats and Republicans interviewed by the Cooperative Election Study (CES) from 2013 to 2021 who live in deep-red or deep-blue counties, the party gap averages 43.1 (95% CI 41.8 to 44.5) points over 12 issues and the place gap averages 5.6 (95% CI 4.7 to 6.6) points. Both gaps are differences in the share of respondents who take the Democratic side of a policy question. The party gap is larger than the place gap on every issue, and the ratio of the two averages is 7.6 (95% CI 6.4 to 9.3). Before adjustment, the interval for the place gap lies above zero on all 12 issues, so the place gap is small and not zero.

The party gap compares Democrats with Republicans who live in the same kind of county. The place gap compares members of one party who live in deep-blue counties with those who live in deep-red counties, where a deep county has a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more toward one party. A stricter cutoff compares more extreme places, and the adjustments for demographics and state in the section on Republican and Democratic place gaps compare respondents who resemble each other or live in the same state. Each of these choices defines which respondents are compared, and under every one of them the place gap is a difference between people who live in different places rather than an estimate of what living there does to a person, since people choose where to live.

Table 1. On every issue the gap between parties is larger than the gap between deep-red and deep-blue counties

The data are CES interviews from 2013 to 2021, 333,335 of which could be matched to a county, and 320,988 of those belong to a party group used in this chapter. Each is matched to the two-party margin of the respondent's county in the most recent presidential election, counting the election of the interview year, and every estimate uses survey weights. The main comparison of party and place uses the 2013 to 2021 interviews. The trend across presidential cycles in Table 8 uses the longer source window of 2006 to 2021, so it includes surveys that the main comparison leaves out. (Note: Unless stated otherwise, every interval in this chapter is a 95% interval from a bootstrap that resamples whole states (50 clusters, 2,000 replicates). The exceptions and the method are in the methods note at the end of the chapter.) The Chapter 2.1, Cohort change in partisan sorting (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/how-the-sort-happened) chapter follows the growth of party differences within birth cohorts, and this chapter asks how much of what remains depends on where a respondent lives.

Respondents are Democrats or Republicans by the three-point party question, so leaners belong to neither group. Each issue is a yes-or-no question, coded so that 100 is the side that Democrats take more often: support for an assault weapons ban, for example, and opposition to repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The party gap on an issue is the Democratic minus Republican difference in the share taking that side, averaged over deep-red and deep-blue counties. The place gap is the deep-blue minus deep-red difference in that share, averaged over Democrats and Republicans.

### The party gap exceeds the place gap on every issue

Table 1 shows both gaps for each issue. The party gap runs from 13.3 (95% CI 12.0 to 14.9) points on universal background checks to 64.1 (95% CI 62.5 to 65.8) points on spending for a border wall. The place gap runs from 2.1 (95% CI 0.9 to 3.1) points on background checks to 12.0 (95% CI 9.2 to 14.6) points on abortion. On no issue do the intervals for the two gaps touch.

Repeal of the ACA shows what the two gaps look like in levels. (Note: The cumulative CES file codes the 2014 answers to the question on repealing the ACA in the opposite direction from the other years: the Republican minus Democratic share supporting repeal is negative in 2014 and positive in each of the other nine survey years. The 2014 answers are reversed here on that evidence and on the cumulative file's release notes; the 2014 value labels have not been checked against the original questionnaire. The sections on ratios and trends report what changes if they are dropped instead.) In deep-red counties 83.1% of Republicans and 25.6% of Democrats support repeal, and in deep-blue counties 78.6% and 21.7%. The party gap on this issue is 57.2 points and the place gap is 4.2 points, a ratio of 13.7. On an assault weapons ban the party gap is 41.9 points and the place gap 7.5 points, a ratio of 5.6. On spending for a border wall the party gap is 64.1 points and the place gap 4.1 points, a ratio of 15.5.

The issues were asked in different years, listed in the data table under the figure. Border wall spending was asked only from 2017, and legal gay marriage only through 2016, so the averages combine periods and describe a set of questions rather than a single year.

### The ratio varies widely by issue

Table 2 divides the party gap by the place gap on each issue. The ratio is 3.6 (95% CI 2.6 to 5.6) on legal gay marriage and 15.5 (95% CI 12.0 to 22.0) on spending for a border wall. The issues with the two smallest ratios, legal gay marriage and abortion, are the two with the largest place gaps, 10.2 and 12.0 points, against party gaps of 36.4 and 46.5 points. The ratios for repeal of the ACA and Medicare for All are the next largest after the border wall's, and the intervals for the three largest ratios overlap, so their order is not settled. If the 2014 answers to the ACA question are dropped instead of reversed, repeal of the ACA has the largest ratio, 16.7 (95% CI 12.0 to 28.8). The ratio for Medicare for All, 12.1 (95% CI 7.9 to 31.4), has the widest interval, because its place gap of 4.2 points is small and a small denominator makes a ratio move with the sample. The median ratio across issues is 8.4 (95% CI 6.7 to 11.0) and the ratio of the average gaps is 7.6 (95% CI 6.4 to 9.3); each interval lies above equal gaps.

Table 2. The party gap is between 3.6 and 15.5 times the place gap, depending on the issue

#### Sensitivity to the county cutoff and to leaners

Two choices in the definition of the gaps move their levels. A deep county is one at or beyond a cutoff on the county margin, and a stricter cutoff compares more extreme places. Table 3 reports the averages at cutoffs of 10 and 40 points as well as the 20 used elsewhere, and with leaners counted as partisans. The place gap is larger when counties are more extreme, the ratio falls as the cutoff rises, and the party gap is larger than the place gap under every definition.

Table 3. The party gap exceeds the place gap under every definition, and the ratio falls as the county cutoff rises

### Support varies less across county margins than between the parties

The deep-county comparison uses only the two ends of the distribution of counties. Table 4 uses every county, grouped into seven bins by two-party margin, for the issues in the panels. In every panel the Democratic and Republican lines are at least 33.0 points apart in every bin. In 9 of the 10 lines the change from the most Republican to the most Democratic bin is toward the Democratic side of the issue, with an interval that excludes zero. The exception is Republican support for a path to legal status, which changes by +3.1 (95% CI −1.1 to 8.5) points.

Table 4. Within each party, support changes less across county margins than it differs between the parties

The two largest changes are among Republicans, +20.1 (95% CI 14.8 to 24.0) points on abortion and +17.0 (95% CI 10.3 to 21.5) points on legal gay marriage, which are also the issues with the largest place gaps. On the assault weapons ban, Republican support rises from 36.5% in the most Republican bin to 49.0% in the most Democratic bin, a change of +12.6 (95% CI 8.6 to 16.9) points, and Democratic support goes from 81.2% to 87.3%. Republican respondents in Democratic counties support a ban more often than Republican respondents in Republican counties, and the change is shallow next to the 41.9 points that separate the parties on this issue.

### Republican place gaps are larger on most issues

Table 5 splits the place gap by party, and the difference between the two parties' average place gaps has an interval that includes zero. Of the 24 place gaps, one for each party on each issue, all 24 have deep-blue counties on the more Democratic side, and 22 have an interval above zero. The Republican gap is larger than the Democratic gap on 9 of the 12 issues, and the two are equal to one decimal on easier concealed carry. The interval for the difference lies above zero on 5 of them, and on 4 of those its lower end is below 1 point. It lies below zero on no issue. Averaged over issues, the Republican place gap is 6.8 (95% CI 5.0 to 8.5) points and the Democratic place gap 4.5 (95% CI 2.8 to 6.3) points. The difference, 2.3 (95% CI −0.7 to 5.1) points, has an interval that includes zero.

Table 5. The Republican place gap is larger on most issues, but the interval for the average difference includes zero

The second and third views of the figure adjust for education, race, age and gender in a weighted linear probability model, and the third adds state fixed effects, so that the comparison is between respondents in the same state. Adjusting for demographics alone leaves 15 of the 24 gaps smaller than the raw gap, and adding state fixed effects leaves 22, with 16 of the 24 having an interval above zero. The state fixed effects compare respondents within states, so they rest on the 34 to 38 states, depending on party and issue, that hold both deep-red and deep-blue counties. The change from the raw gap therefore combines the adjustment with a change in sample. With both adjustments the Republican gap is larger than the Democratic gap on 8 of the 12 issues, and the interval for the difference lies above zero on the assault weapons ban and background checks only. On the assault weapons ban the adjusted Republican gap is 8.7 (95% CI 6.8 to 10.7) points and the Democratic gap 4.4 (95% CI 2.3 to 6.6) points, a difference of +4.3 (95% CI 1.3 to 7.3) points. On abortion and legal gay marriage the adjusted intervals for the two parties overlap.

### Independents with no lean have larger place gaps than partisans

Here an independent is a respondent at the middle of the seven-point party scale who did not name a party, and the two groups of leaners are shown apart. Across the 12 issues, the average place gap of independents with no lean is 9.2 (95% CI 7.4 to 10.7) points, which is 3.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 5.0) points more than the average for Democrats and Republicans together. Table 6 shows all five groups. In point estimates the place gap of independents with no lean is larger than both partisan place gaps on 9 of the 12 issues. Democratic leaners have an average place gap of 3.3 points and Republican leaners of 6.7 points.

Table 6. The average place gap is larger among independents with no lean than among Democrats and Republicans

Table 7 follows one issue, support for universal background checks, which has the smallest party gap and the smallest place gap of the issues in Table 1, across the bins of county margin for all the party groups. Democrats support the policy at 95.0% to 96.3% in every bin, near the top of the scale, which leaves little room to rise, and Republicans at 80.3% to 84.4%. Independents with no lean go from 79.0% support in the most Republican bin to 86.1% in the most Democratic bin, a change of +7.1 (95% CI 3.2 to 10.8) points. Republican leaners go from 71.0% to 79.3%, a change of +8.3 (95% CI 3.8 to 11.9) points. Both intervals lie above zero. For Democrats and Democratic leaners the interval for the change includes zero, and for Republicans the change is +3.4 (95% CI 0.0 to 5.9) points and the interval reaches zero.

Table 7. Support for background checks rises with county margin among independents and Republican leaners, not among Democrats

### The party gap rose on most issues

Table 8 follows 4 issues across presidential cycles, including the two with the longest history, border security and a path to legal status. A presidential cycle pools the surveys from one presidential election to the next and uses the county margin of that election, so the 2016 cycle covers surveys from 2016 to 2019. The trend draws on the 2006 to 2021 source window rather than on the 2013 to 2021 interviews of the main comparison alone, so its earlier cycles include surveys from before 2013. Between the first and last cycle in which an issue was asked, the party gap rose on 3 of the 4 issues, with an interval above zero. On repeal of the ACA the party gap went from 53.8 points in the 2012 cycle to 55.8 points in the 2020 cycle, a change of +2.0 (95% CI 0.0 to 4.1) points whose interval reaches zero. With the 2014 answers dropped instead of reversed, the change is +5.9 (95% CI 3.6 to 8.3) points, with an interval above zero. (Note: Not every issue was asked in every survey, so an endpoint can rest on one or two surveys. The 2004 cycle is the 2007 survey alone and its groups are small, universal background checks in the 2020 cycle rest on the 2021 survey alone, and abortion in the 2012 cycle rests on the 2014 and 2015 surveys. The survey years behind every point are in the data tables.)

Table 8. The party gap rose on 3 of these 4 issues across presidential cycles and stayed above both place gaps

Table 9 gives the change for all 12 issues, grouped by the span of cycles over which each was asked. The party gap rose on 8 of them with an interval above zero. It fell on universal background checks, where the change is −3.3 (95% CI −6.0 to −0.7) points, and the interval includes zero on 3: legal gay marriage, repeal of the ACA and cutting legal immigration. The issues asked over the longest span, border security and a path to legal status, have the widest intervals: between the 2004 and 2020 cycles the party gap rose by +16.7 points on border security and +15.5 points on a path to legal status. Between the 2012 and 2020 cycles it rose by +13.4 points on abortion and +10.3 points on the assault weapons ban.

Table 9. The party gap rose on 8 of 12 issues over spans that differ by issue, and fell on background checks

The average place gap changed by more than sampling error on 3 of the 12 issues, and each change is a fall: −5.8 (95% CI −8.7 to −2.4) points on abortion, −4.2 (95% CI −6.4 to −1.8) on legal gay marriage and −3.1 (95% CI −5.3 to −0.9) on repeal of the ACA. With the 2014 answers to the ACA question dropped instead of reversed, the change on repeal of the ACA is −0.7 (95% CI −3.0 to 1.6) points, and its interval includes zero. The fall on abortion is mostly a Democratic one: the Democratic place gap goes from 14.6 points in the 2012 cycle to 4.9 points in the 2020 cycle, and the Republican gap from 13.8 to 12.0 points. The Democratic place gap on a path to legal status changed by −7.1 (95% CI −10.3 to −4.2) points between the 2012 and 2016 cycles, from 9.0 to 1.9 points. It was 1.7 points in the 2020 cycle, a change of −0.2 (95% CI −2.6 to 2.2) points from 2016. The steps before 2012 have intervals that include zero.

### A second survey gives ratios of the same order

The CES records the respondent's county. The American National Election Studies (ANES) record only the state, so a check with ANES uses a coarser place. Table 10 repeats the calculation for strong and not very strong partisans in deep states, meaning states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more. The four groups of party by state type hold 3,752 to 4,410 respondents in all, depending on the measure, and 3,933 on the liberal-conservative scale. (Note: ANES states are known for only part of the 2024 sample, and the gun question was not asked in 2024. The ANES partisans are those who call themselves strong or not very strong Democrats or Republicans, which matches the three-point CES measure. Leaners are excluded.) The liberal-conservative scale, rescaled so that 100 is the most liberal answer, has a party gap of 41.3 points and a place gap of 4.7 points, a ratio of 8.8 (95% CI 4.7 to 24.2). The ratios on the ANES issue questions have smaller point estimates: 3.2 for making it harder to buy a gun, 2.9 for not decreasing immigration, 2.8 for a law against job discrimination and 2.5 (95% CI 1.5 to 4.2) for abortion. Among these questions only the interval for abortion lies below the interval for the ideology scale, as the ratio tab of the figure shows.

Table 10. In both surveys the party gap is larger than the place gap on every measure

Abortion is the one question asked in both surveys. At the state level, ANES gives a party gap of 42.9 points and a place gap of 17.4 points, and the CES gives 46.4 and 14.3, a ratio of 3.2 (95% CI 2.3 to 4.3) against 2.5 in ANES. Over all issues at the state level, the CES party gap is 43.3 points, the place gap 5.5 points and the ratio 7.9 (95% CI 5.1 to 13.7), close to the county-level values in Table 1. The ANES intervals are wide because each group of party by state type holds a limited number of states and respondents, and the two surveys differ in questions, years and level of place. They agree on the order of magnitude of the ratio, and the intervals are too wide to say more.

### The party gap does not vary clearly with state partisanship

Table 11 asks whether the party gap depends on how Democratic or Republican a state is. Each dot is a state, with its party gap averaged over the issues plotted against the state's mean two-party margin. The state party gap averages 45.7 points, with a standard deviation of 5.4 points across 49 states. That spread includes the sampling error of each state's estimate, whose standard error is 1.3 points in the median state. The District of Columbia is not plotted because too few issues have enough respondents of each party there. The fitted slope is −0.5 (95% CI −1.3 to 0.4) points of party gap per 10 points of Democratic margin. The point estimate is a fall in the gap as states become more Democratic, and the interval also includes no change.

Table 11. The party gap averages 45.7 points across states and shows no clear relation to a state's partisanship

Hopkins argued that American political behavior has nationalized, with voters more engaged with national politics than with the politics of places nearer home [1]. If that account holds, the party gap should depend little on a state's partisanship, and the flat slope is consistent with it, though the interval also allows a modest fall. This chapter does not test the account, and a flat relation across states says nothing about influence inside a county or a neighborhood, which Planned, Variation in opinion within places (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/variation-in-opinion-within-places; planned) takes up.

### What these data cannot show

The place gap is a difference between respondents who live in different counties. It is not an estimate of what a county does to a person. People choose where to live, and the respondents who live in deep-blue counties may differ from those in deep-red counties in ways that survey questions on education, race, age and gender do not capture. Mummolo and Nall ask why partisans do not sort more by place and study the constraints on political segregation [2]. Earlier work on political context, from a 1984 survey in South Bend, Indiana, found that people build discussion networks that match their own views, that the political composition of their social context limits this, and that the interaction favors the local majority [3]. A cross-section cannot separate influence from selection, and evidence on people who move is the design that can. Planned, Movers and opinion change (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/movers-and-opinion-change; planned) takes up that design.

The party gap is not an estimate of what a party does to an opinion either. Party identification and issue positions shape each other, and party has taken on other identities, so a Democrat and a Republican also differ in race, religion and much else [4]. The two gaps are also measured on 12 questions that were available in the survey, on guns, immigration, abortion, marriage, health care and climate. Their ratio would change with a different set of issues, and the ceiling of a share on a yes-or-no question limits how large a gap can be. The policy questions end in 2021, so the chapter says nothing about later years.

The county is one level of place. A finer level, such as a neighborhood, could show larger place gaps, and a coarser one, such as the state, shows the ANES and CES gaps above. The chapter does not measure the variation in opinion among people who live in one place, which Planned, Variation in opinion within places (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/variation-in-opinion-within-places; planned) measures, or the share of partisans who live where their party loses, which Planned, Partisans in the other party's territory (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/partisans-outvoted-at-home; planned) measures. Place-specific contexts such as recent immigration may matter more for some issues than the county margin does, as Planned, Immigration and local context (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/immigration-and-local-context; planned) examines, and the change in a county's vote over time has its own accounting in Planned, Composition and behavior in county change (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/composition-and-behavior-in-county-change; planned).

The intervals describe sampling variation in an opt-in online panel. They treat the states as an independent sample of clusters and the survey weights as correct, and they do not cover error from who joins the panel or from question wording. With few clusters, standard cluster-robust tests can over-reject [5], and the resampling method used here is simpler than the one that paper proposes. The ratio is uncertain where the place gap is small.

## Tables

### Table 1. On every issue the gap between parties is larger than the gap between deep-red and deep-blue counties

Gap in the share taking the Democratic side, in points, by issue; Democrats and Republicans in deep counties; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| Issue | Democratic side of the question | Survey years | Party gap | Party gap, low | Party gap, high | Place gap | Place gap, low | Place gap, high | Ratio | Smallest group, n |
| --- | --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Assault weapons ban | Support an assault weapons ban | 2013 to 2021 | 41.9 | 40.3 | 43.8 | 7.5 | 6.1 | 9.0 | 5.6 | 16,440 |
| Background checks | Support universal background checks for gun buyers | 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 13.3 | 12.0 | 14.9 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 3.1 | 6.5 | 13,375 |
| Concealed carry | Oppose easier concealed carry | 2013 to 2021 | 38.8 | 37.1 | 40.7 | 4.8 | 3.4 | 6.4 | 8.1 | 16,452 |
| Border security | Oppose more spending on border security | 2013 to 2021, not 2018 | 40.2 | 38.6 | 42.0 | 5.3 | 3.7 | 6.7 | 7.6 | 13,428 |
| Path to legal status | Support a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants | 2013 to 2021, not 2018 | 38.7 | 36.9 | 40.3 | 4.1 | 2.6 | 5.8 | 9.6 | 13,422 |
| Border wall | Oppose spending on a border wall | 2017 to 2021, not 2019 | 64.1 | 62.5 | 65.8 | 4.1 | 2.9 | 5.3 | 15.5 | 8,257 |
| Gay marriage | Support legal gay marriage | 2013 to 2016 | 36.4 | 33.6 | 39.3 | 10.2 | 6.6 | 13.7 | 3.6 | 7,161 |
| Repeal the ACA | Oppose repealing the Affordable Care Act | 2013 to 2021 | 57.2 | 55.8 | 58.8 | 4.2 | 2.8 | 5.4 | 13.7 | 16,459 |
| EPA regulates CO2 | Support letting the EPA regulate carbon dioxide | 2014 to 2021 | 44.4 | 42.3 | 46.5 | 5.2 | 3.5 | 6.9 | 8.6 | 15,459 |
| Abortion legal | Support always allowing abortion as a matter of choice | 2014 to 2021 | 46.5 | 44.7 | 48.7 | 12.0 | 9.2 | 14.6 | 3.9 | 15,818 |
| Medicare for All | Support Medicare for All | 2018 to 2021 | 51.3 | 49.3 | 53.6 | 4.2 | 1.7 | 6.4 | 12.1 | 8,385 |
| Cut immigration | Oppose cutting legal immigration by half | 2018 to 2020 | 44.2 | 42.6 | 45.7 | 4.1 | 2.5 | 5.9 | 10.8 | 7,157 |

Note: A deep county is one where the two-party presidential margin is at or beyond the cutoff stated in the text. The share is measured on the side of each issue that Democrats take more often, which the data table names for each question.

Note: The issues were asked in different survey years, listed in the data table, so the averages combine periods. The number in a tooltip is the smallest of the four party by county-type groups behind the row.

Note: Ratios are computed from unrounded gaps, so a ratio can differ in its last digit from the quotient of the gaps as printed.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/gaps_by_issue.json

### Table 2. The party gap is between 3.6 and 15.5 times the place gap, depending on the issue

Party gap divided by place gap, by issue, with 95% intervals; Democrats and Republicans in deep counties; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| issue | n | ratio | ratio_hi | ratio_lo |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Border wall | 8,257 | 15.48 | 21.99 | 12.04 |
| Repeal the ACA | 16,459 | 13.75 | 20.22 | 10.67 |
| Medicare for All | 8,385 | 12.13 | 31.41 | 7.86 |
| Abortion legal | 15,818 | 3.89 | 5.16 | 3.12 |
| EPA regulates CO2 | 15,459 | 8.60 | 13.07 | 6.22 |
| Cut immigration | 7,157 | 10.76 | 17.65 | 7.43 |
| Assault weapons ban | 16,440 | 5.62 | 7.09 | 4.55 |
| Border security | 13,428 | 7.61 | 10.85 | 6.02 |
| Concealed carry | 16,452 | 8.15 | 11.59 | 6.08 |
| Path to legal status | 13,422 | 9.55 | 15.43 | 6.43 |
| Gay marriage | 7,161 | 3.56 | 5.62 | 2.63 |
| Background checks | 13,375 | 6.47 | 14.12 | 4.23 |

Note: The number in a tooltip is the smallest of the four party by county-type groups behind the ratio. The interval is skewed to the right where the place gap is small. The intervals for the three largest ratios overlap, and with the 2014 answers to the ACA question dropped instead of reversed, repeal of the ACA has the largest ratio.

Note: Ratios are computed from unrounded gaps, so a ratio can differ in its last digit from the quotient of the gaps as printed.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/ratio_by_issue.json

### Table 3. The party gap exceeds the place gap under every definition, and the ratio falls as the county cutoff rises

Average party gap and place gap over the issues, in points (share taking the Democratic side), and their ratio, with 95% intervals; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| Definition | Party gap | Party gap, low | Party gap, high | Place gap | Place gap, low | Place gap, high | Ratio | Ratio, low | Ratio, high |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Deep county: margin of 10 points or more | 43.8 | 42.7 | 45.0 | 4.5 | 3.8 | 5.2 | 9.8 | 8.4 | 11.7 |
| Deep county: margin of 20 points or more (used in this chapter) | 43.1 | 41.8 | 44.5 | 5.6 | 4.7 | 6.6 | 7.6 | 6.4 | 9.3 |
| Deep county: margin of 40 points or more | 42.3 | 40.1 | 44.5 | 7.3 | 5.8 | 8.9 | 5.8 | 4.6 | 7.5 |
| Leaners counted as partisans, margin of 20 points or more | 44.6 | 43.4 | 46.0 | 5.4 | 4.5 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 7.1 | 10.1 |

Note: Ratios are computed from unrounded gaps, so a ratio can differ in its last digit from the quotient of the gaps as printed.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/definition_checks.json

### Table 4. Within each party, support changes less across county margins than it differs between the parties

Share supporting the policy (%) by party and two-party margin of the respondent's county, seven bins of counties; five issues; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| bin | conf_high | conf_low | estimate | issue | margin | n | party |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | ---: | ---: | --- |
| Below -40 | 83.49 | 78.63 | 81.16 | Assault weapons ban | −53.35 | 8,553 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 84.61 | 81.24 | 83.00 | Assault weapons ban | −29.09 | 13,631 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 86.74 | 82.80 | 84.81 | Assault weapons ban | −12.70 | 13,578 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 87.03 | 82.65 | 84.91 | Assault weapons ban | 0.112 | 13,026 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 87.40 | 85.78 | 86.56 | Assault weapons ban | 12.20 | 25,300 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 88.29 | 85.24 | 86.68 | Assault weapons ban | 28.48 | 21,675 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 88.59 | 86.32 | 87.29 | Assault weapons ban | 56.26 | 27,716 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 38.65 | 34.48 | 36.47 | Assault weapons ban | −53.35 | 14,432 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 40.55 | 36.62 | 38.73 | Assault weapons ban | −29.09 | 15,619 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 42.39 | 37.62 | 40.22 | Assault weapons ban | −12.70 | 11,652 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 43.05 | 37.73 | 40.29 | Assault weapons ban | 0.112 | 9,253 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 45.48 | 40.82 | 43.35 | Assault weapons ban | 12.20 | 14,228 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 48.90 | 44.40 | 46.96 | Assault weapons ban | 28.48 | 9,629 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 53.43 | 44.84 | 49.04 | Assault weapons ban | 56.26 | 6,811 | Republicans |
| Below -40 | 75.61 | 69.08 | 72.62 | Path to legal status | −53.35 | 6,731 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 74.12 | 70.02 | 72.14 | Path to legal status | −29.09 | 10,838 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 74.83 | 70.90 | 72.89 | Path to legal status | −12.70 | 11,500 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 75.21 | 70.21 | 72.70 | Path to legal status | 0.112 | 10,868 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 75.95 | 73.97 | 74.97 | Path to legal status | 12.20 | 21,339 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 78.10 | 74.79 | 76.47 | Path to legal status | 28.48 | 18,012 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 79.18 | 76.62 | 77.95 | Path to legal status | 56.26 | 23,266 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 36.16 | 32.90 | 34.40 | Path to legal status | −53.35 | 11,088 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 36.32 | 33.01 | 34.63 | Path to legal status | −29.09 | 12,294 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 35.04 | 32.07 | 33.68 | Path to legal status | −12.70 | 9,881 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 37.36 | 33.83 | 35.49 | Path to legal status | 0.112 | 7,640 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 37.94 | 32.68 | 35.41 | Path to legal status | 12.20 | 11,721 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 39.71 | 35.64 | 37.72 | Path to legal status | 28.48 | 7,837 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 42.74 | 34.03 | 37.53 | Path to legal status | 56.26 | 5,585 | Republicans |
| Below -40 | 29.34 | 25.13 | 27.44 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −53.35 | 8,556 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 26.22 | 22.46 | 24.38 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −29.09 | 13,619 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 25.96 | 22.44 | 24.14 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −12.70 | 13,555 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 24.41 | 21.30 | 22.93 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 0.112 | 13,014 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 23.21 | 19.73 | 21.69 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 12.20 | 25,277 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 24.37 | 19.24 | 21.95 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 28.48 | 21,665 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 23.79 | 18.73 | 21.58 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 56.26 | 27,714 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 83.72 | 80.90 | 82.42 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −53.35 | 14,470 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 84.83 | 82.53 | 83.71 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −29.09 | 15,630 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 86.79 | 84.59 | 85.73 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | −12.70 | 11,652 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 84.54 | 82.01 | 83.16 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 0.112 | 9,251 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 83.07 | 80.21 | 81.47 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 12.20 | 14,220 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 80.89 | 77.95 | 79.42 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 28.48 | 9,633 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 79.84 | 76.22 | 77.40 | Repeal the ACA (support for repeal) | 56.26 | 6,826 | Republicans |
| Below -40 | 73.89 | 66.74 | 70.37 | Abortion legal | −53.35 | 8,255 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 76.25 | 71.90 | 74.15 | Abortion legal | −29.09 | 13,015 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 79.82 | 76.77 | 78.39 | Abortion legal | −12.70 | 12,696 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 80.64 | 75.54 | 78.21 | Abortion legal | 0.112 | 12,287 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 82.08 | 78.67 | 80.43 | Abortion legal | 12.20 | 24,028 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 82.96 | 77.85 | 80.38 | Abortion legal | 28.48 | 20,804 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 84.98 | 81.98 | 83.59 | Abortion legal | 56.26 | 26,619 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 23.12 | 19.97 | 21.57 | Abortion legal | −53.35 | 14,058 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 27.82 | 23.39 | 25.76 | Abortion legal | −29.09 | 15,033 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 31.62 | 26.02 | 28.88 | Abortion legal | −12.70 | 10,900 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 34.39 | 29.48 | 32.33 | Abortion legal | 0.112 | 8,783 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 35.55 | 29.43 | 32.95 | Abortion legal | 12.20 | 13,516 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 38.48 | 32.15 | 35.59 | Abortion legal | 28.48 | 9,260 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 45.05 | 36.31 | 41.62 | Abortion legal | 56.26 | 6,558 | Republicans |
| Below -40 | 68.37 | 59.64 | 63.90 | Gay marriage | −53.35 | 3,353 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 71.41 | 64.60 | 67.99 | Gay marriage | −29.09 | 6,079 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 75.93 | 68.93 | 72.89 | Gay marriage | −12.70 | 6,730 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 76.62 | 67.97 | 72.01 | Gay marriage | 0.112 | 6,378 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 77.24 | 70.62 | 74.08 | Gay marriage | 12.20 | 11,861 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 77.28 | 67.94 | 72.45 | Gay marriage | 28.48 | 9,357 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 79.15 | 70.81 | 75.20 | Gay marriage | 56.26 | 12,598 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 27.81 | 22.79 | 25.22 | Gay marriage | −53.35 | 5,044 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 31.00 | 26.70 | 28.98 | Gay marriage | −29.09 | 6,668 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 35.05 | 28.89 | 31.87 | Gay marriage | −12.70 | 5,720 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 39.46 | 33.00 | 36.45 | Gay marriage | 0.112 | 4,399 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 40.11 | 34.02 | 37.51 | Gay marriage | 12.20 | 6,431 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 41.78 | 35.92 | 38.96 | Gay marriage | 28.48 | 4,079 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 45.50 | 35.94 | 42.18 | Gay marriage | 56.26 | 3,082 | Republicans |

Note: Counties are grouped by the Democratic minus Republican margin of the most recent presidential election; the data table names the bins. The two outer bins cover a wider range of margins than the others.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/support_by_margin.json

### Table 5. The Republican place gap is larger on most issues, but the interval for the average difference includes zero

Place gap in points (deep-blue minus deep-red counties, share taking the Democratic side) for Democrats and Republicans, by issue; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| Model | Issue | Democrats | Democrats, low | Democrats, high | Republicans | Republicans, low | Republicans, high | Republican minus Democratic | Difference, low | Difference, high | Democrats, n | Republicans, n | Democrats, states | Republicans, states |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| raw | Border wall | 1.9 | −0.5 | 4.3 | 6.4 | 3.8 | 8.4 | +4.5 | +0.2 | +8.4 | 36,261 | 24,614 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Repeal the ACA | 3.8 | 1.4 | 6.3 | 4.5 | 2.6 | 6.0 | +0.7 | −3.0 | +3.9 | 71,554 | 46,559 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Medicare for All | 2.7 | 1.2 | 4.2 | 5.7 | 0.8 | 9.7 | +3.0 | −1.9 | +7.1 | 36,118 | 25,023 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Abortion legal | 9.5 | 6.1 | 12.9 | 14.4 | 10.9 | 17.5 | +4.9 | +0.5 | +8.5 | 68,693 | 44,909 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | EPA regulates CO2 | 3.7 | 1.9 | 5.5 | 6.6 | 3.5 | 10.0 | +2.9 | −0.9 | +7.1 | 66,941 | 43,698 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Cut immigration | 3.5 | 1.3 | 6.0 | 4.8 | 2.8 | 6.8 | +1.3 | −1.5 | +4.1 | 30,037 | 21,417 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Assault weapons ban | 4.7 | 2.9 | 6.9 | 10.2 | 7.9 | 12.6 | +5.4 | +2.0 | +8.6 | 71,575 | 46,491 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Border security | 6.2 | 3.3 | 9.1 | 4.3 | 2.1 | 6.4 | −1.9 | −6.0 | +2.4 | 58,832 | 36,812 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Concealed carry | 4.8 | 2.8 | 7.2 | 4.8 | 2.4 | 7.4 | 0.0 | −3.5 | +3.6 | 71,622 | 46,533 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Path to legal status | 5.0 | 2.8 | 7.3 | 3.1 | 0.5 | 6.0 | −1.9 | −5.7 | +1.9 | 58,847 | 36,804 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Gay marriage | 7.5 | 2.4 | 12.5 | 13.0 | 9.3 | 16.2 | +5.5 | +0.7 | +10.2 | 31,387 | 18,873 | 50 | 50 |
| raw | Background checks | 0.5 | −0.2 | 1.3 | 3.6 | 1.4 | 5.6 | +3.0 | +0.5 | +5.3 | 58,365 | 37,872 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Border wall | 1.2 | −1.0 | 3.3 | 2.3 | 0.5 | 4.1 | +1.1 | −2.3 | +4.5 | 36,193 | 24,604 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Repeal the ACA | 3.6 | 1.7 | 5.5 | 2.7 | 1.1 | 4.2 | −0.9 | −3.4 | +1.5 | 71,486 | 46,549 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Medicare for All | 2.0 | 0.6 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 0.5 | 6.1 | +1.3 | −1.7 | +4.2 | 36,050 | 25,013 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Abortion legal | 10.1 | 7.1 | 13.1 | 12.8 | 9.5 | 16.0 | +2.7 | −0.3 | +5.6 | 68,625 | 44,899 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | EPA regulates CO2 | 3.8 | 2.2 | 5.4 | 5.7 | 3.1 | 8.2 | +1.9 | −1.3 | +5.0 | 66,873 | 43,688 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Cut immigration | 2.6 | 0.6 | 4.7 | 0.4 | −1.5 | 2.3 | −2.3 | −4.7 | +0.2 | 30,037 | 21,417 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Assault weapons ban | 5.7 | 4.0 | 7.5 | 10.5 | 8.2 | 12.8 | +4.8 | +1.9 | +7.7 | 71,507 | 46,481 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Border security | 4.9 | 2.4 | 7.4 | 1.7 | −0.1 | 3.5 | −3.1 | −6.7 | +0.4 | 58,764 | 36,802 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Concealed carry | 5.7 | 3.9 | 7.5 | 5.1 | 2.6 | 7.6 | −0.7 | −3.7 | +2.4 | 71,554 | 46,523 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Path to legal status | 3.2 | 1.3 | 5.1 | 1.1 | −1.3 | 3.5 | −2.1 | −5.2 | +1.0 | 58,779 | 36,794 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Gay marriage | 10.2 | 6.6 | 13.8 | 12.7 | 9.0 | 16.3 | +2.5 | −1.7 | +6.6 | 31,387 | 18,873 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics | Background checks | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.8 | 4.1 | 1.8 | 6.4 | +3.1 | +0.5 | +5.6 | 58,297 | 37,862 | 50 | 50 |
| demographics_state | Border wall | 0.7 | −1.6 | 2.9 | 2.1 | −0.1 | 4.4 | +1.4 | −2.5 | +5.3 | 36,193 | 24,604 | 37 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Repeal the ACA | 2.8 | 0.6 | 4.9 | 1.5 | −0.2 | 3.1 | −1.3 | −4.1 | +1.5 | 71,486 | 46,549 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Medicare for All | 1.7 | 0.2 | 3.2 | 2.5 | −0.2 | 5.2 | +0.8 | −2.2 | +3.9 | 36,050 | 25,013 | 37 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Abortion legal | 6.4 | 3.4 | 9.4 | 8.1 | 6.1 | 10.1 | +1.7 | −1.9 | +5.2 | 68,625 | 44,899 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | EPA regulates CO2 | 2.6 | 0.8 | 4.3 | 5.5 | 3.1 | 7.9 | +2.9 | −0.6 | +6.5 | 66,873 | 43,688 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Cut immigration | 1.9 | 0.1 | 3.8 | 1.0 | −1.3 | 3.3 | −0.9 | −3.1 | +1.3 | 30,037 | 21,417 | 37 | 34 |
| demographics_state | Assault weapons ban | 4.4 | 2.3 | 6.6 | 8.7 | 6.8 | 10.7 | +4.3 | +1.3 | +7.3 | 71,507 | 46,481 | 37 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Border security | 3.1 | 0.5 | 5.7 | 1.6 | −0.2 | 3.5 | −1.4 | −5.2 | +2.4 | 58,764 | 36,802 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Concealed carry | 4.5 | 2.5 | 6.4 | 4.9 | 2.6 | 7.2 | +0.5 | −3.1 | +4.0 | 71,554 | 46,523 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Path to legal status | 2.7 | 0.7 | 4.7 | 2.0 | −0.4 | 4.4 | −0.7 | −4.0 | +2.6 | 58,779 | 36,794 | 38 | 35 |
| demographics_state | Gay marriage | 5.6 | 1.2 | 10.1 | 8.6 | 4.7 | 12.5 | +3.0 | −1.7 | +7.6 | 31,387 | 18,873 | 36 | 34 |
| demographics_state | Background checks | 0.7 | −0.3 | 1.6 | 3.3 | 1.3 | 5.3 | +2.6 | +0.5 | +4.7 | 58,297 | 37,862 | 37 | 35 |

Views: Raw (model = raw); Demographics (model = demographics); Demographics + state fixed effects (model = demographics_state).

Note: Raw gaps and the raw difference come from a bootstrap over states. Adjusted gaps are coefficients from weighted linear regressions among Democrats or Republicans in deep counties, with standard errors clustered by state and normal intervals. The adjusted difference is the coefficient on deep-blue by Republican in a regression with every term interacted with party, clustered the same way.

Note: Rows are in the order of the first figure (party gap, largest first) in every view. The numbers in a tooltip are the respondents behind each dot. The data table gives the difference, its interval and the number of states behind each gap.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/place_gap_by_party.json

### Table 6. The average place gap is larger among independents with no lean than among Democrats and Republicans

Place gap averaged over the issues, in points (deep-blue minus deep-red counties, share taking the Democratic side), by party group, with 95% intervals; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| n | party_id | place_gap | place_gap_hi | place_gap_lo |
| ---: | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| 9,432 | Democrats | 4.49 | 6.29 | 2.79 |
| 2,804 | Democratic leaners | 3.33 | 4.59 | 1.98 |
| 5,761 | Independents (no lean) | 9.18 | 10.70 | 7.37 |
| 2,783 | Republican leaners | 6.69 | 8.78 | 4.58 |
| 7,157 | Republicans | 6.78 | 8.47 | 5.00 |

Note: The tooltip shows the smallest of the two county-type groups behind each average. The place gaps of Democrats and Republicans in this figure are the same as the averages in the figure on Republican and Democratic place gaps. Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/place_gap_by_party_id.json

### Table 7. Support for background checks rises with county margin among independents and Republican leaners, not among Democrats

Share supporting universal background checks (%) by party identification and two-party margin of the respondent's county, seven bins of counties; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| bin | conf_high | conf_low | estimate | margin | n | party_id |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- |
| Below -40 | 96.81 | 94.81 | 95.91 | −53.35 | 7,003 | Democrats |
| -40 to -20 | 95.87 | 94.21 | 95.02 | −29.09 | 11,448 | Democrats |
| -20 to -5 | 96.78 | 95.46 | 96.20 | −12.70 | 11,168 | Democrats |
| -5 to 5 | 97.09 | 95.31 | 96.29 | 0.112 | 10,899 | Democrats |
| 5 to 20 | 96.46 | 95.23 | 95.87 | 12.20 | 20,631 | Democrats |
| 20 to 40 | 96.70 | 95.37 | 96.04 | 28.48 | 17,396 | Democrats |
| Above 40 | 96.61 | 95.06 | 95.80 | 56.26 | 22,518 | Democrats |
| Below -40 | 96.66 | 92.91 | 94.77 | −53.35 | 2,183 | Lean Dem. |
| -40 to -20 | 96.23 | 93.87 | 95.06 | −29.09 | 3,477 | Lean Dem. |
| -20 to -5 | 95.66 | 92.41 | 94.06 | −12.70 | 3,152 | Lean Dem. |
| -5 to 5 | 96.77 | 93.52 | 95.18 | 0.112 | 2,952 | Lean Dem. |
| 5 to 20 | 97.06 | 95.64 | 96.37 | 12.20 | 5,520 | Lean Dem. |
| 20 to 40 | 97.23 | 94.11 | 95.61 | 28.48 | 4,321 | Lean Dem. |
| Above 40 | 97.13 | 95.46 | 96.21 | 56.26 | 4,813 | Lean Dem. |
| Below -40 | 82.12 | 75.65 | 78.95 | −53.35 | 5,500 | Independents |
| -40 to -20 | 83.92 | 79.89 | 82.06 | −29.09 | 6,604 | Independents |
| -20 to -5 | 85.36 | 78.83 | 82.51 | −12.70 | 5,603 | Independents |
| -5 to 5 | 87.87 | 82.44 | 85.18 | 0.112 | 4,769 | Independents |
| 5 to 20 | 86.61 | 83.58 | 85.13 | 12.20 | 8,452 | Independents |
| 20 to 40 | 87.70 | 83.30 | 85.67 | 28.48 | 6,078 | Independents |
| Above 40 | 87.81 | 83.76 | 86.09 | 56.26 | 5,701 | Independents |
| Below -40 | 73.68 | 68.67 | 70.95 | −53.35 | 3,870 | Lean Rep. |
| -40 to -20 | 74.74 | 68.63 | 71.91 | −29.09 | 4,417 | Lean Rep. |
| -20 to -5 | 77.88 | 70.76 | 74.35 | −12.70 | 3,652 | Lean Rep. |
| -5 to 5 | 78.91 | 73.10 | 76.15 | 0.112 | 2,888 | Lean Rep. |
| 5 to 20 | 81.74 | 76.67 | 79.38 | 12.20 | 4,687 | Lean Rep. |
| 20 to 40 | 83.15 | 77.37 | 80.47 | 28.48 | 3,132 | Lean Rep. |
| Above 40 | 82.15 | 75.74 | 79.28 | 56.26 | 2,270 | Lean Rep. |
| Below -40 | 81.79 | 78.63 | 80.31 | −53.35 | 11,459 | Republicans |
| -40 to -20 | 82.36 | 78.79 | 80.73 | −29.09 | 13,038 | Republicans |
| -20 to -5 | 83.15 | 79.25 | 81.50 | −12.70 | 9,468 | Republicans |
| -5 to 5 | 84.38 | 80.03 | 82.26 | 0.112 | 7,663 | Republicans |
| 5 to 20 | 84.28 | 80.85 | 82.84 | 12.20 | 11,619 | Republicans |
| 20 to 40 | 86.17 | 82.45 | 84.42 | 28.48 | 7,804 | Republicans |
| Above 40 | 85.67 | 80.29 | 83.66 | 56.26 | 5,571 | Republicans |

Note: The vertical axis starts at 60%, not at zero, so slopes look steeper than in the county-margin figure with a full axis.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/bg_checks_by_party_id.json

### Table 8. The party gap rose on 3 of these 4 issues across presidential cycles and stayed above both place gaps

Gap in points (share taking the Democratic side) by presidential cycle, Democrats and Republicans in deep counties; four issues; CES surveys 2006 to 2021

| Issue | Series | Presidential cycle | Survey years | Estimate | Low | High | Smallest group, n |
| --- | --- | ---: | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Path to legal status | Between-party gap | 2004 | 2007 | 27.8 | 20.8 | 33.1 | 367 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Democrats | 2004 | 2007 | 11.2 | 2.2 | 18.4 | 367 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Republicans | 2004 | 2007 | 1.9 | −3.5 | 9.3 | 367 |
| Path to legal status | Between-party gap | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 32.1 | 29.3 | 34.9 | 2,932 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Democrats | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 9.2 | 4.2 | 14.8 | 2,932 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Republicans | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 2.7 | −0.6 | 6.9 | 2,932 |
| Path to legal status | Between-party gap | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 35.7 | 32.9 | 38.1 | 6,215 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Democrats | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 9.0 | 5.5 | 12.5 | 6,215 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Republicans | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 3.8 | 0.2 | 7.8 | 6,215 |
| Path to legal status | Between-party gap | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 40.0 | 37.7 | 42.0 | 5,394 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Democrats | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 1.9 | 0.0 | 3.7 | 5,394 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Republicans | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 3.5 | −0.4 | 7.5 | 5,394 |
| Path to legal status | Between-party gap | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 43.3 | 41.4 | 45.3 | 4,267 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Democrats | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 1.7 | −0.2 | 3.6 | 4,267 |
| Path to legal status | Place gap, Republicans | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 2.5 | −0.4 | 5.2 | 4,267 |
| Border security | Between-party gap | 2004 | 2007 | 30.1 | 20.5 | 37.9 | 367 |
| Border security | Place gap, Democrats | 2004 | 2007 | 6.2 | −2.6 | 12.7 | 367 |
| Border security | Place gap, Republicans | 2004 | 2007 | −2.8 | −11.5 | 8.4 | 367 |
| Border security | Between-party gap | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 29.4 | 27.0 | 31.4 | 2,932 |
| Border security | Place gap, Democrats | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 9.5 | 5.9 | 13.3 | 2,932 |
| Border security | Place gap, Republicans | 2008 | 2010 and 2011 | 2.3 | −1.5 | 5.7 | 2,932 |
| Border security | Between-party gap | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 33.2 | 30.6 | 35.9 | 6,215 |
| Border security | Place gap, Democrats | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 6.1 | 2.4 | 9.6 | 6,215 |
| Border security | Place gap, Republicans | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 3.7 | 0.1 | 6.9 | 6,215 |
| Border security | Between-party gap | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 41.0 | 38.9 | 42.9 | 5,396 |
| Border security | Place gap, Democrats | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 6.8 | 3.4 | 10.2 | 5,396 |
| Border security | Place gap, Republicans | 2016 | 2016 and 2017 and 2019 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 6.9 | 5,396 |
| Border security | Between-party gap | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 46.8 | 45.1 | 48.8 | 4,271 |
| Border security | Place gap, Democrats | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 7.5 | 3.4 | 10.8 | 4,271 |
| Border security | Place gap, Republicans | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 4.6 | 2.0 | 6.6 | 4,271 |
| Repeal the ACA | Between-party gap | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 53.8 | 51.8 | 55.8 | 6,062 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Democrats | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 8.6 | 5.5 | 11.6 | 6,062 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Republicans | 2012 | 2012 to 2015 | 2.3 | −0.4 | 4.7 | 6,062 |
| Repeal the ACA | Between-party gap | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 59.5 | 58.0 | 61.5 | 8,476 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Democrats | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 1.2 | −1.8 | 4.0 | 8,476 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Republicans | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 5.2 | 3.4 | 6.9 | 8,476 |
| Repeal the ACA | Between-party gap | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 55.8 | 54.2 | 57.7 | 4,262 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Democrats | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 0.2 | −2.8 | 3.0 | 4,262 |
| Repeal the ACA | Place gap, Republicans | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 4.5 | 1.7 | 7.0 | 4,262 |
| Abortion legal | Between-party gap | 2012 | 2014 and 2015 | 39.6 | 36.9 | 42.3 | 3,052 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Democrats | 2012 | 2014 and 2015 | 14.6 | 9.6 | 19.2 | 3,052 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Republicans | 2012 | 2014 and 2015 | 13.8 | 9.0 | 17.8 | 3,052 |
| Abortion legal | Between-party gap | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 46.5 | 44.3 | 49.2 | 8,493 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Democrats | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 9.2 | 5.6 | 12.7 | 8,493 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Republicans | 2016 | 2016 to 2019 | 15.6 | 11.3 | 19.3 | 8,493 |
| Abortion legal | Between-party gap | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 53.0 | 50.4 | 55.7 | 4,273 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Democrats | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 4.9 | 2.0 | 8.2 | 4,273 |
| Abortion legal | Place gap, Republicans | 2020 | 2020 and 2021 | 12.0 | 7.5 | 15.7 | 4,273 |

Note: A presidential cycle pools the surveys from one presidential election to the next and uses the county margin of that election. Not every issue was asked in every survey, so the first and last cycle of an issue can rest on one or two surveys. Survey years behind the first and last cycle of each panel: Path to legal status, 2004 cycle 2007 and 2020 cycle 2020 and 2021; Border security, 2004 cycle 2007 and 2020 cycle 2020 and 2021; Repeal the ACA, 2012 cycle 2012 to 2015 and 2020 cycle 2020 and 2021; Abortion legal, 2012 cycle 2014 and 2015 and 2020 cycle 2020 and 2021. The data table gives the survey years behind every point.

Note: The 2004 cycle rests on one survey year, so its bands are wide. A cycle with a party by county-type group below the suppression floor would be dropped; none was. The number in a tooltip is the smallest of the four party by county-type groups behind the estimate.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2006-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/gap_trend.json

### Table 9. The party gap rose on 8 of 12 issues over spans that differ by issue, and fell on background checks

Change in the between-party gap in points (share taking the Democratic side), first to last presidential cycle in which each issue was asked, grouped by span; Democrats and Republicans in deep counties; CES surveys 2006 to 2021

| Issue | Cycles | Survey years, first cycle | Survey years, last cycle | Party gap change | Low | High | Party gap change per cycle | Place gap change | Place gap change, low | Place gap change, high | Smaller endpoint, n |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Border security | Cycles 2004 to 2020 | 2007 | 2020 and 2021 | +16.7 | +9.4 | +26.0 | +4.2 | +4.3 | −2.6 | +10.6 | 2,767 |
| Path to legal status | Cycles 2004 to 2020 | 2007 | 2020 and 2021 | +15.5 | +10.2 | +22.9 | +3.9 | −4.5 | −9.8 | +0.9 | 2,767 |
| Abortion legal | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2014 and 2015 | 2020 and 2021 | +13.4 | +9.8 | +17.0 | +6.7 | −5.8 | −8.7 | −2.4 | 20,940 |
| Assault weapons ban | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2013 to 2015 | 2020 and 2021 | +10.3 | +7.6 | +13.4 | +5.2 | −1.5 | −4.5 | +1.4 | 25,669 |
| Concealed carry | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2013 to 2015 | 2020 and 2021 | +6.8 | +3.8 | +10.2 | +3.4 | −0.9 | −3.7 | +1.8 | 25,716 |
| EPA regulates CO2 | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2014 and 2015 | 2020 and 2021 | +3.5 | +0.3 | +7.2 | +1.8 | −1.0 | −4.4 | +2.3 | 20,800 |
| Repeal the ACA | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2012 to 2015 | 2020 and 2021 | +2.0 | 0.0 | +4.1 | +1.0 | −3.1 | −5.3 | −0.9 | 31,281 |
| Background checks | Cycles 2012 to 2020 | 2013 to 2015 | 2021 | −3.3 | −6.0 | −0.7 | −1.6 | −1.3 | −3.6 | +1.1 | 9,240 |
| Gay marriage | Cycles 2012 to 2016 | 2012 to 2015 | 2016 | −2.1 | −4.3 | +0.5 | −2.1 | −4.2 | −6.4 | −1.8 | 24,606 |
| Border wall | Cycles 2016 to 2020 | 2017 and 2018 | 2020 and 2021 | +6.1 | +4.1 | +8.3 | +6.1 | −0.3 | −2.2 | +1.6 | 29,562 |
| Medicare for All | Cycles 2016 to 2020 | 2018 and 2019 | 2020 and 2021 | +5.7 | +3.2 | +8.5 | +5.7 | −1.6 | −4.1 | +0.8 | 29,844 |
| Cut immigration | Cycles 2016 to 2020 | 2018 and 2019 | 2020 | −0.5 | −3.0 | +2.1 | −0.5 | +0.2 | −2.0 | +2.4 | 22,064 |

Views: Party gap; Place gap.

Note: Issues were asked over different spans, so the cycles differ by row. The survey years behind each cycle, the change per cycle and the change in the place gap with its interval are in the data table. The number in a tooltip is the size of the smaller of the two endpoint cycles.

Note: Universal background checks were not asked in 2020, so the last cycle for that issue rests on the 2021 survey alone.

Note: Intervals are 95% intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states; they are model based and ignore the design of the panel.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2006-2021; county returns for the two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/party_gap_change.json

### Table 10. In both surveys the party gap is larger than the place gap on every measure

Party gap and place gap at the state level, and their ratio, by measure; ANES waves 2012 to 2024 and CES survey years 2013 to 2021

#### Table 10.1. Gaps

The party gap is larger than the place gap on every measure in both surveys

Gap in points on a 0 to 100 scale, strong and not very strong partisans in deep states; ANES waves 2012 to 2024 and CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| Measure | Place level | Party gap | Party gap, low | Party gap, high | Place gap | Place gap, low | Place gap, high | Respondents |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| ANES ideology | state | 41.3 | 38.8 | 43.6 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 8.8 | 3,933 |
| ANES abortion | state | 42.9 | 37.7 | 47.6 | 17.4 | 11.2 | 28.2 | 4,410 |
| ANES gun purchase | state | 44.1 | 41.0 | 50.0 | 13.8 | 6.7 | 19.3 | 3,752 |
| ANES immigration | state | 27.7 | 23.0 | 30.5 | 9.4 | 2.9 | 18.0 | 4,005 |
| ANES job discrimination | state | 16.5 | 11.5 | 19.6 | 6.0 | 1.6 | 13.2 | 3,889 |
| CES abortion | state | 46.4 | 43.7 | 48.7 | 14.3 | 11.2 | 18.9 | 113,602 |
| CES all issues, state | state | 43.3 | 41.2 | 45.2 | 5.5 | 3.3 | 8.2 | 67,860 |
| CES all issues, county | county | 43.1 | 41.8 | 44.5 | 5.6 | 4.7 | 6.6 | 118,638 |

#### Table 10.2. Ratio

Among the ANES measures, only the abortion ratio has an interval below the one for the ideology scale

Party gap divided by place gap, with 95% intervals, strong and not very strong partisans in deep states; ANES waves 2012 to 2024 and CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| Measure | Place level | Ratio | Ratio, low | Ratio, high | Respondents |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| ANES ideology | state | 8.8 | 4.7 | 24.2 | 3,933 |
| ANES abortion | state | 2.5 | 1.5 | 4.2 | 4,410 |
| ANES gun purchase | state | 3.2 | 2.3 | 6.5 | 3,752 |
| ANES immigration | state | 2.9 | 1.4 | 9.0 | 4,005 |
| ANES job discrimination | state | 2.8 | 1.1 | 8.9 | 3,889 |
| CES abortion | state | 3.2 | 2.3 | 4.3 | 113,602 |
| CES all issues, state | state | 7.9 | 5.1 | 13.7 | 67,860 |
| CES all issues, county | county | 7.6 | 6.4 | 9.3 | 118,638 |

Note: ANES partisans are strong and not very strong identifiers, which matches the three-point CES measure. Leaners are excluded. State is known for only part of the 2024 ANES sample, and the gun question was not asked in 2024.

Note: Each issue in ANES is a different question from the CES issues except abortion, so only the abortion rows compare the same wording. Intervals come from a bootstrap over the states in the ANES sample and are wide because the deep-state groups are small.

Source: ANES cumulative data file, waves 2012-2024, weighted (VCF0009z); CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021, weighted (weight_cumulative); state returns for the two-party margin

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/anes_check.json

### Table 11. The party gap averages 45.7 points across states and shows no clear relation to a state's partisanship

State party gap averaged over the issues, in points, against the state's mean two-party presidential margin; Democrats and Republicans; CES survey years 2013 to 2021

| State | State two-party margin | Party gap | Standard error | Party gap, low | Party gap, high | Respondents per issue |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| AL | −26.3 | 41.5 | 1.3 | 38.9 | 44.1 | 2,259 |
| AZ | −4.6 | 49.9 | 1.0 | 48.0 | 51.9 | 3,836 |
| AR | −27.1 | 41.0 | 1.7 | 37.7 | 44.2 | 1,287 |
| CA | +28.9 | 44.1 | 0.6 | 43.0 | 45.2 | 15,069 |
| CO | +7.3 | 53.3 | 1.2 | 51.0 | 55.7 | 2,446 |
| CT | +16.6 | 41.3 | 1.8 | 37.8 | 44.8 | 1,569 |
| DE | +15.7 | 43.0 | 2.4 | 38.3 | 47.8 | 650 |
| FL | −1.0 | 41.8 | 0.6 | 40.7 | 42.9 | 12,328 |
| GA | −4.9 | 42.6 | 0.9 | 40.9 | 44.3 | 5,087 |
| HI | +36.0 | 31.5 | 3.2 | 25.2 | 37.7 | 479 |
| ID | −34.3 | 51.2 | 2.2 | 46.8 | 55.6 | 761 |
| IL | +17.6 | 43.5 | 0.8 | 41.8 | 45.1 | 6,436 |
| IN | −16.1 | 44.4 | 1.0 | 42.4 | 46.4 | 3,457 |
| IA | −4.0 | 47.9 | 1.3 | 45.3 | 50.5 | 1,539 |
| KS | −20.7 | 49.8 | 1.6 | 46.7 | 52.9 | 1,215 |
| KY | −27.6 | 39.5 | 1.4 | 36.9 | 42.2 | 2,683 |
| LA | −19.1 | 38.0 | 1.6 | 34.9 | 41.0 | 1,758 |
| ME | +8.5 | 49.2 | 2.1 | 45.1 | 53.3 | 789 |
| MD | +28.9 | 46.7 | 1.0 | 44.8 | 48.7 | 3,066 |
| MA | +28.3 | 45.8 | 1.4 | 43.1 | 48.6 | 2,552 |
| MI | +3.8 | 44.5 | 1.0 | 42.6 | 46.5 | 4,873 |
| MN | +5.0 | 52.2 | 1.1 | 50.0 | 54.4 | 2,676 |
| MS | −15.8 | 37.1 | 1.8 | 33.7 | 40.6 | 1,162 |
| MO | −15.4 | 48.1 | 1.0 | 46.1 | 50.2 | 3,397 |
| MT | −18.6 | 56.2 | 2.2 | 51.9 | 60.5 | 502 |
| NE | −23.5 | 52.7 | 1.6 | 49.6 | 55.9 | 950 |
| NV | +4.0 | 46.4 | 1.6 | 43.3 | 49.5 | 1,851 |
| NH | +3.7 | 50.5 | 2.2 | 46.2 | 54.8 | 692 |
| NJ | +16.0 | 42.0 | 0.9 | 40.1 | 43.8 | 4,431 |
| NM | +10.1 | 49.3 | 1.9 | 45.5 | 53.1 | 1,018 |
| NY | +27.8 | 38.9 | 0.7 | 37.6 | 40.3 | 10,028 |
| NC | −2.7 | 44.9 | 0.8 | 43.2 | 46.5 | 4,781 |
| ND | −31.9 | 48.4 | 3.2 | 42.1 | 54.6 | 313 |
| OH | −4.4 | 42.3 | 0.7 | 40.9 | 43.8 | 6,810 |
| OK | −36.0 | 47.4 | 1.7 | 44.1 | 50.7 | 1,528 |
| OR | +13.2 | 57.3 | 1.1 | 55.2 | 59.4 | 2,468 |
| PA | +1.8 | 43.3 | 0.6 | 42.1 | 44.5 | 9,050 |
| RI | +21.5 | 39.6 | 3.4 | 33.0 | 46.2 | 404 |
| SC | −12.8 | 43.4 | 1.1 | 41.2 | 45.7 | 2,259 |
| SD | −26.2 | 52.7 | 2.5 | 47.8 | 57.6 | 413 |
| TN | −24.3 | 45.5 | 1.2 | 43.2 | 47.9 | 3,129 |
| TX | −10.5 | 43.4 | 0.6 | 42.2 | 44.6 | 10,983 |
| UT | −32.2 | 45.1 | 1.7 | 41.7 | 48.5 | 1,215 |
| VT | +34.0 | 41.2 | 3.9 | 33.6 | 48.8 | 298 |
| VA | +6.1 | 45.5 | 1.0 | 43.6 | 47.3 | 4,569 |
| WA | +17.3 | 53.2 | 1.1 | 51.0 | 55.5 | 3,329 |
| WV | −37.4 | 37.8 | 1.8 | 34.2 | 41.3 | 1,078 |
| WI | +2.2 | 48.4 | 0.9 | 46.5 | 50.2 | 3,156 |
| WY | −47.1 | 54.4 | 3.0 | 48.5 | 60.4 | 265 |

Note: The dots carry no whiskers because the scatter chart draws none. The data table gives each state's standard error and a 95% interval (normal, from a linearised standard error that treats respondents within a state as independent). The largest standard error is 3.9 points, and the smallest state has 265 Democrats and Republicans per issue on average.

Note: A state needs at least 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans on an issue for that issue to count, and at least ten issues to appear. The tooltip shows the average number of respondents per issue. The District of Columbia has fewer than ten such issues and is not plotted, so the scatter has 49 states while the bootstrap for the other estimates has 50 clusters.

Source: CES cumulative common content, 2013-2021; state presidential returns (MEDSL) for the state two-party margin; weighted (weight_cumulative)

Data: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/state_party_gap.json

## All estimates

Every fact in facts.json (148), sorted by id.

| Fact id | Value | Unit | Estimand | Population | Period | Interval | n | Weights | Source | Note |
| --- | ---: | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---: | --- | --- | --- |
| abort_dem_2012 | 14.6 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Democratic place gap on abortion | Democrats in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2012 presidential cycle | 95% CI 9.6 to 19.2 | 20,940 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_dem_2020 | 4.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Democratic place gap on abortion | Democrats in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2020 presidential cycle | 95% CI 2.0 to 8.2 | 31,326 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_party_change | +13.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI 9.8 to 17.0 | 52,266 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_party_gap | 46.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 44.7 to 48.7 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_place_change | −5.8 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the place gap averaged over the two parties | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI −8.7 to −2.4 | 52,266 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_place_gap | 12.0 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 9.2 to 14.6 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_ratio | 3.9 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 3.1 to 5.2 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_rep_2012 | 13.8 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Republican place gap on abortion | Republicans in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2012 presidential cycle | 95% CI 9.0 to 17.8 | 20,940 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_rep_2020 | 12.0 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Republican place gap on abortion | Republicans in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2020 presidential cycle | 95% CI 7.5 to 15.7 | 31,326 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| abort_rep_diff | +20.1 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 14.8 to 24.0 | 20,616 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_dem_blue | 21.7% | percent of respondents supporting repeal of the ACA | weighted share supporting repeal; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats in deep-blue counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 19.7% to 23.5% | 49,379 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_dem_red | 25.6% | percent of respondents supporting repeal of the ACA | weighted share supporting repeal; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats in deep-red counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 23.8% to 27.0% | 22,175 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_party_2012 | 53.8 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | party gap in the 2012 cycle | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES surveys pooled in the 2012 presidential cycle | 95% CI 51.8 to 55.8 | 41,833 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_party_2020 | 55.8 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | party gap in the 2020 cycle | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES surveys pooled in the 2020 presidential cycle | 95% CI 54.2 to 57.7 | 31,281 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_party_change | +2.0 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI 0.0 to 4.1 | 73,114 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_party_change_drop | +5.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | repeal of the ACA, change in the party gap from the 2012 to the 2020 cycle, with the 2014 answers dropped instead of reversed | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 without 2014 | 95% CI 3.6 to 8.3 | 73,114 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_party_gap | 57.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 55.8 to 58.8 | 118,113 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_place_change | −3.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the place gap averaged over the two parties | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI −5.3 to −0.9 | 73,114 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_place_change_drop | −0.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | repeal of the ACA, change in the place gap averaged over the two parties from the 2012 to the 2020 cycle, with the 2014 answers dropped instead of reversed | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 without 2014 | 95% CI −3.0 to 1.6 | 73,114 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_place_gap | 4.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 2.8 to 5.4 | 118,113 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_ratio | 13.7 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 10.7 to 20.2 | 118,113 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_ratio_drop | 16.7 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | repeal of the ACA, party gap divided by place gap, with the 2014 answers dropped instead of reversed | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 without 2014 | 95% CI 12.0 to 28.8 | 101,590 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_rep_blue | 78.6% | percent of respondents supporting repeal of the ACA | weighted share supporting repeal; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans in deep-blue counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 77.5% to 80.0% | 16,459 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| aca_rep_red | 83.1% | percent of respondents supporting repeal of the ACA | weighted share supporting repeal; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans in deep-red counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 82.0% to 84.1% | 30,100 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| anes_abort_party | 42.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | party gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 37.7 to 47.6 | 4,410 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_abort_place | 17.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | place gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 11.2 to 28.2 | 4,410 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_abort_ratio | 2.5 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | party gap divided by place gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 1.5 to 4.2 | 4,410 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_guns_ratio | 3.2 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | party gap divided by place gap at the state level | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 2.3 to 6.5 | 3,752 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_ideo_party | 41.3 | points (difference in the liberal-conservative index, liberal = 100, on a 0 to 100 scale) | party gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 38.8 to 43.6 | 3,933 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_ideo_place | 4.7 | points (difference in the liberal-conservative index, liberal = 100, on a 0 to 100 scale) | place gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 1.7 to 8.8 | 3,933 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_ideo_ratio | 8.8 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | party gap divided by place gap at the state level; state-cluster bootstrap interval | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 4.7 to 24.2 | 3,933 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_imm_ratio | 2.9 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | party gap divided by place gap at the state level | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 1.4 to 9.0 | 4,005 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_lgbt_ratio | 2.8 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | party gap divided by place gap at the state level | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 | 95% CI 1.1 to 8.9 | 3,889 | weight (VCF0009z, ANES cumulative full-sample weight) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_n_max | 4,410 | respondents | largest count of respondents in the four cells behind any of the five ANES measures | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 |   |   | none (count) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_n_min | 3,752 | respondents | smallest count of respondents in the four cells behind any of the five ANES measures | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 |   |   | none (count) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| anes_n_partisans | 3,933 | respondents | count of respondents in the four cells behind the ideology scale | strong and not very strong Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | ANES waves 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 |   |   | none (count) | ANES Cumulative Data File |   |
| awb_adj_diff | +4.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Republican minus Democratic place gap, coefficient on deep-blue by Republican in a weighted regression with education, race, age, gender and state fixed effects; every term interacted with party; standard errors clustered by state | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 1.3 to 7.3 | 118,066 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_dem_adj | 4.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | place gap from a weighted linear regression with education, race, age, gender and state fixed effects; standard errors clustered by state | Democrats in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 2.3 to 6.6 | 71,507 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_dem_first | 81.2% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats in the most Republican bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 78.6% to 83.5% | 8,553 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_dem_last | 87.3% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats in the most Democratic bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 86.3% to 88.6% | 27,716 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_party_change | +10.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI 7.6 to 13.4 | 56,992 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_party_gap | 41.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 40.3 to 43.8 | 118,066 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_place_gap | 7.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 6.1 to 9.0 | 118,066 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_ratio | 5.6 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 4.6 to 7.1 | 118,066 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_rep_adj | 8.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | place gap from a weighted linear regression with education, race, age, gender and state fixed effects; standard errors clustered by state | Republicans in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 6.8 to 10.7 | 46,481 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_rep_diff | +12.6 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 8.6 to 16.9 | 21,243 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_rep_first | 36.5% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans in the most Republican bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 34.5% to 38.6% | 14,432 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| awb_rep_last | 49.0% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans in the most Democratic bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021 | 95% CI 44.8% to 53.4% | 6,811 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_axis_start | 60 | percent | axis start | the lower end of the vertical axis of the background-check figure | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_dem_max | 96.3% | percent of respondents supporting universal background checks | weighted share supporting; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats, highest of the seven county bins | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 95.3% to 97.1% | 10,899 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_dem_min | 95.0% | percent of respondents supporting universal background checks | weighted share supporting; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Democrats, lowest of the seven county bins | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 94.2% to 95.9% | 11,448 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_ind_diff | +7.1 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Independents with no lean | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 3.2 to 10.8 | 11,201 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_ind_first | 79.0% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Independents with no lean in the most Republican bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 75.6% to 82.1% | 5,500 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_ind_last | 86.1% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Independents with no lean in the most Democratic bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 83.8% to 87.8% | 5,701 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_lr_diff | +8.3 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republican leaners | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 3.8 to 11.9 | 6,140 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_lr_first | 71.0% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republican leaners in the most Republican bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 68.7% to 73.7% | 3,870 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_lr_last | 79.3% | percent of respondents supporting | weighted share supporting the policy; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republican leaners in the most Democratic bin of counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 75.7% to 82.2% | 2,270 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_party_change | −3.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2012 to 2020 | 95% CI −6.0 to −0.7 | 35,013 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_rep_diff | +3.4 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 0.0 to 5.9 | 17,030 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_rep_max | 84.4% | percent of respondents supporting universal background checks | weighted share supporting; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans, highest of the seven county bins | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 82.4% to 86.2% | 7,804 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bg_rep_min | 80.3% | percent of respondents supporting universal background checks | weighted share supporting; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans, lowest of the seven county bins | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2020 | 95% CI 78.6% to 81.8% | 11,459 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| bin_gap_min | 33.0 | points (distance between the Democratic and Republican lines) | smallest distance between the two party lines over the seven county bins and the five issues, in the share supporting the policy | Democrats and Republicans in the five panels of the county-margin figure | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 35 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| boot_reps | 2,000 | replicates | bootstrap replicates | cluster bootstrap | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| border_party_change | +16.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2004 to 2020 | 95% CI 9.4 to 26.0 | 34,077 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_abort_state_party | 46.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | abortion always legal, state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 43.7 to 48.7 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_abort_state_place | 14.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | abortion always legal, state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 11.2 to 18.9 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_abort_state_ratio | 3.2 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | abortion always legal, state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2014 to 2021 | 95% CI 2.3 to 4.3 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_state_party | 43.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues at the state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 41.2 to 45.2 | 67,860 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_state_place | 5.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues at the state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 3.3 to 8.2 | 67,860 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ces_state_ratio | 7.9 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | average over the issues at the state level | Democrats and Republicans in states with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 5.1 to 13.7 | 67,860 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| deep_cell_n_min | 7,157 | respondents | smallest cell count | smallest of the party by county-type cells behind any issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| deep_cut | 20 | points of two-party margin | a county is deep red or deep blue at this margin or more | county classification | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| fe_states_max | 38 | states | count of states that identify the state fixed effects gap | states holding both a deep-red and a deep-blue county for the party and issue (most over the combinations) | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| fe_states_min | 34 | states | count of states that identify the state fixed effects gap | states holding both a deep-red and a deep-blue county for the party and issue (fewest over the combinations) | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| gay_party_gap | 36.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2016 | 95% CI 33.6 to 39.3 | 50,260 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| gay_place_change | −4.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the place gap averaged over the two parties | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES cycles 2012 to 2016 | 95% CI −6.4 to −1.8 | 67,144 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| gay_place_gap | 10.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2016 | 95% CI 6.6 to 13.7 | 50,260 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| gay_ratio | 3.6 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2016 | 95% CI 2.6 to 5.6 | 50,260 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| gay_rep_diff | +17.0 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans | CES survey years 2013 to 2016 | 95% CI 10.3 to 21.5 | 8,126 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ind_minus_partisan | 3.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average place gap of Independents with no lean minus the average place gap of Democrats and Republicans | Independents with no lean, Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 1.9 to 5.0 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ind_place_mean | 9.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the place gap among Independents with no lean | Independents who lean toward neither party (middle of the seven-point scale) in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 7.4 to 10.7 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| lean_dem_place_mean | 3.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the place gap among Democratic leaners | Democratic leaners in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 2.0 to 4.6 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| lean_rep_place_mean | 6.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the place gap among Republican leaners | Republican leaners in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 4.6 to 8.8 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| m4a_place_gap | 4.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2018 to 2021 | 95% CI 1.7 to 6.4 | 61,141 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| m4a_ratio | 12.1 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2018 to 2021 | 95% CI 7.9 to 31.4 | 61,141 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| margin_step | 10 | points of two-party margin | step in the state margin used for the slope | slope of the state party gap on the state margin | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_adj_ci_pos | 16 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations, model with demographics and state fixed effects | adjusted place gaps with an interval above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_adj_diff_ci_pos_demo | 2 | issues | count of issues | issues where the interval for the adjusted Republican minus Democratic difference lies above zero, demographics only | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_adj_diff_ci_pos_fe | 2 | issues | count of issues | issues where the interval for the adjusted Republican minus Democratic difference lies above zero, demographics and state fixed effects | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_adj_smaller | 22 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations, model with demographics and state fixed effects | adjusted place gaps smaller than the raw gap | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_adj_smaller_demo | 15 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations, model with demographics only | adjusted place gaps smaller than the raw gap | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_bin_lines | 10 | lines | count of lines | party lines drawn in the five panels of the county-margin figure | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_bin_lines_toward | 9 | lines | count of lines | lines whose change from the most Republican to the most Democratic bin is toward the Democratic side of the issue with an interval that excludes zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_ind_larger | 9 | issues | count of issues, point estimates | issues where the Independents' place gap exceeds both partisan gaps | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_issues | 12 | policy questions | count of issues | the CES policy questions used in the chapter | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_matched | 333,335 | respondents | count of respondents | CES respondents interviewed in 2013 to 2021 with a matched county and a positive weight, in any party group or none | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_partisans_deep | 118,638 | respondents | count of respondents with a county margin and a party, any issue | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_party_flat | 3 | issues | count of issues | issues whose party gap change between the first and last cycle has an interval that includes zero | CES cycles |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_party_up | 8 | issues | count of issues | issues whose party gap rose between the first and last cycle, with an interval above zero | CES cycles |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_party_up_panels | 3 | issues | count of issues | issues drawn in the trend panels whose party gap rose between the first and last cycle, with an interval above zero | CES cycles |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_place_avg_ci_pos | 12 | issues | count of issues | issues whose average place gap has an interval above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_place_cells | 24 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations | Democrats and Republicans on each issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_place_change_sig | 3 | issues | count of issues whose change has an interval that excludes zero | issues whose average place gap changed by more than sampling error between the first and last cycle | CES cycles |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_place_ci_pos | 22 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations with a positive interval | combinations whose interval lies above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_place_pos | 24 | party by issue combinations | count of combinations with a positive point estimate | combinations with a place gap above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_pool | 320,988 | respondents | count of respondents | CES respondents interviewed in 2013 to 2021 with a matched county, a positive weight and one of the five party groups | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_rep_larger | 9 | issues | count of issues with a point estimate of the difference above zero to one decimal | issues where the Republican place gap exceeds the Democratic one by at least a tenth of a point | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_rep_larger_ci | 5 | issues | count of issues | issues where the difference has an interval above zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_rep_larger_ci_thin | 4 | issues | count of issues | issues where the interval for the difference lies above zero by less than one point at its lower end | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_rep_larger_demo | 7 | issues | count of issues with a positive point estimate | issues where the adjusted Republican place gap exceeds the Democratic one, demographics only | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_rep_larger_fe | 8 | issues | count of issues with a positive point estimate | issues where the adjusted Republican place gap exceeds the Democratic one, demographics and state fixed effects | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_states | 50 | clusters | number of resampling clusters | states and the District of Columbia with matched respondents, Alaska excluded | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_states_scatter | 49 | states | count of states in the scatter | states with enough respondents on at least ten issues | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| n_trend_items | 4 | issues | count of issues | issues drawn in the trend panels | CES cycles |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| party_gap_max | 64.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | largest party gap over the issues (border wall) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 62.5 to 65.8 | 60,875 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| party_gap_mean | 43.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the party gap: Democratic minus Republican share taking the Democratic side, averaged over deep-red and deep-blue counties | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 41.8 to 44.5 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| party_gap_min | 13.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | smallest party gap over the issues (universal background checks) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 12.0 to 14.9 | 96,237 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_dem_mean | 4.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the Democratic place gap | Democrats in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 2.8 to 6.3 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_diff_mean | 2.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the Republican place gap minus the Democratic place gap | Democrats and Republicans in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI −0.7 to 5.1 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_gap_max | 12.0 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | largest place gap over the issues (abortion) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 9.2 to 14.6 | 113,602 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_gap_mean | 5.6 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the place gap: deep-blue minus deep-red county share taking the Democratic side, averaged over Democrats and Republicans | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 4.7 to 6.6 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_gap_min | 2.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | smallest place gap over the issues (universal background checks) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 0.9 to 3.1 | 96,237 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| place_rep_mean | 6.8 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | average over the issues of the Republican place gap | Republicans in deep counties | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 5.0 to 8.5 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ratio_max | 15.5 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | largest party to place ratio over the issues (border wall) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 12.0 to 22.0 | 60,875 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ratio_means | 7.6 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | average party gap divided by average place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 6.4 to 9.3 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ratio_means_county | 7.6 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | average party gap divided by average place gap; bootstrap interval resampling counties instead of states | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 6.7 to 8.9 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ratio_median | 8.4 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | median over the issues of the party gap divided by the place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 6.7 to 11.0 | 118,638 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| ratio_min | 3.6 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | smallest party to place ratio over the issues (legal gay marriage) | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI 2.6 to 5.6 | 50,260 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| scale_max | 100 | points | definition of the scale | the top of the scale on which every issue is coded, where 100 is the side that Democrats take more often | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| state_gap_mean | 45.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | mean over states of the state party gap averaged over the issues | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 49 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| state_gap_sd | 5.4 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | standard deviation across states of the state party gap | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 49 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study | The spread includes sampling error in each state's estimate. No interval. |
| state_gap_slope | −0.5 | points of party gap per 10 points of state Democratic margin | least squares slope of the state party gap on the state's mean two-party margin, times 10; bootstrap over states | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked | 95% CI −1.3 to 0.4 | 49 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| state_n_min | 265 | respondents | average number of Democrats and Republicans per issue in the state with the fewest | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 265 | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| state_se_max | 3.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | largest across states of the standard error of the state party gap averaged over the issues (Taylor linearisation) | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 49 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| state_se_median | 1.3 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | median across states of the standard error of the state party gap averaged over the issues (Taylor linearisation, respondents treated as independent within a state) | Democrats and Republicans in each state, states with at least 50 of each on an issue | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   | 49 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| thin_cut | 1 | points | cutoff used to count intervals that only just clear zero | a lower interval end within this many points of zero is called close to zero | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| thr_high | 40 | points of two-party margin | higher cutoff tried | sensitivity check on the deep-county cutoff | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| thr_low | 10 | points of two-party margin | lower cutoff tried | sensitivity check on the deep-county cutoff | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, each issue in the years it was asked |   |   | none (count) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_dem_2012 | 9.0 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Democratic place gap on a path to legal status | Democrats in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2012 presidential cycle | 95% CI 5.5 to 12.5 | 42,924 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_dem_2016 | 1.9 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Democratic place gap on a path to legal status | Democrats in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2016 presidential cycle | 95% CI 0.0 to 3.7 | 38,453 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_dem_2020 | 1.7 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | Democratic place gap on a path to legal status | Democrats in deep counties | CES surveys pooled in the 2020 presidential cycle | 95% CI −0.2 to 3.6 | 31,307 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_dem_step_last | −0.2 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the Democratic place gap on a path to legal status between cycles | Democrats in deep counties | CES cycles 2016 to 2020 | 95% CI −2.6 to 2.2 | 69,760 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_dem_step_mid | −7.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the Democratic place gap on a path to legal status between cycles | Democrats in deep counties | CES cycles 2012 to 2016 | 95% CI −10.3 to −4.2 | 81,377 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_party_change | +15.5 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | change in the party gap from the first to the last cycle in which the issue was asked | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES cycles 2004 to 2020 | 95% CI 10.2 to 22.9 | 34,074 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| undoc_rep_diff | +3.1 | points (change in the share supporting, most Democratic bin minus most Republican bin) | difference in the weighted share supporting between the most Democratic and the most Republican bin of counties; state-cluster bootstrap interval | Republicans | CES survey years 2013 to 2021, not 2018 | 95% CI −1.1 to 8.5 | 16,673 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| wall_party_gap | 64.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2017 to 2021, not 2019 | 95% CI 62.5 to 65.8 | 60,875 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| wall_place_gap | 4.1 | points (difference in the share taking the Democratic side, on a 0 to 100 scale) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval of the party gap or place gap | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2017 to 2021, not 2019 | 95% CI 2.9 to 5.3 | 60,875 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |
| wall_ratio | 15.5 | ratio (party gap divided by place gap) | difference in the weighted share taking the Democratic side; state-cluster bootstrap interval; ratio of the two | Democrats and Republicans (three-point party identification, leaners excluded) in counties with a two-party presidential margin of 20 points or more | CES survey years 2017 to 2021, not 2019 | 95% CI 12.0 to 22.0 | 60,875 | weight_cumulative (CES cumulative weight; each survey year carries the same total weight) | Cooperative Election Study |   |

## Definitions

- Percentage point: The unit for the difference between two percentages. A change from one share to another is stated in points, not in percent, so that absolute and relative change are not confused.
- County two-party margin: The Democratic vote minus the Republican vote, divided by the sum of the two, so a positive value is a Democratic lead. Votes for other candidates are left out.
- Survey weights: Numbers that scale each respondent so the sample matches the population on known traits such as age, race, education and region. A weighted average counts a respondent with a large weight for more than one with a small weight.
- Confidence interval: A range around an estimate that would contain the true value in 95% of repeated samples if the sampling model held. The book reports 95% intervals unless it says otherwise.
- Partisan leaner: A respondent who first says they are independent but, when asked, says they lean toward one party. Most figures group leaners with the party they lean toward, and each chapter says which grouping it uses.
- Linear probability model: A regression of a yes-or-no outcome on predictors, fitted by least squares so that each coefficient is a change in the probability of yes. The book weights it and reports robust standard errors.
- Fixed effects: Regression terms that give each group, such as each country or each year, its own baseline. The other coefficients then compare respondents within the same group.
- Standard deviation: A measure of how far values typically fall from their average. A larger standard deviation means the values are more spread out.

## Methods

Sample: Cooperative Election Study interviews in 2013 to 2021 (2006 to 2021 for the trend by presidential cycle) that could be matched to a county with presidential returns, Alaska excluded, with a positive weight: 333,335 interviews in 2013 to 2021, of which 320,988 are in a party group used here and 118,638 are Democrats or Republicans in deep counties. Coding: in the cumulative file the 2014 answers to the question on repealing the Affordable Care Act have the partisan pattern of the opposite code from the other years (the Republican minus Democratic share supporting repeal is negative in 2014 and positive in every other year), so the 2014 answers are reversed. The guide to the cumulative policy file records that the 2014 question was worded differently from the other years (a vote to repeal, in Congress, after a description of the law, where the adjacent years asked whether the respondent supported or opposed repeal) and that an earlier release of the file had switched the 2014 answers and the current release does not. The guide gives one pooled set of value labels and no year-specific labels for 2014, so the reversal rests on the partisan pattern and on that record, and the original 2014 labels have not been checked against the questionnaire. The build stops if any issue has a Democratic minus Republican gap at or below zero in any survey year, which tests the expected partisan direction and is not an independent check of the coding. Party: the three-point identification, so leaners are outside the Democrats and Republicans; independents are respondents at the middle of the seven-point scale, and leaners are shown apart. Place: the two-party margin of the respondent's county in the most recent presidential election, counting the election of the interview year, from the repaired county returns file; a deep county has a margin of 20 points or more toward one party. Outcomes: 12 yes-or-no policy questions, each oriented so that 100 is the side that Democrats take more often. Weights: weight_cumulative, which gives every survey year the same total weight. Estimator: weighted means in party by county-type cells; the party gap is the Democratic minus Republican difference averaged over deep-red and deep-blue counties, the place gap is the deep-blue minus deep-red difference averaged over Democrats and Republicans, and the ratio is the party gap divided by the place gap. Adjusted place gaps are coefficients on a deep-blue indicator in weighted linear regressions with education, race, age and gender, with and without state fixed effects, and standard errors clustered by state; the adjusted Republican minus Democratic difference is the coefficient on deep-blue by Republican in a regression with every term interacted with party. Intervals: unless stated otherwise, 95% percentile intervals from a bootstrap that resamples whole states (50 clusters, the states and the District of Columbia, 2,000 replicates, seed 12345), with gaps, ratios and medians computed inside each replicate. Respondents in one state share a political environment, so treating them as independent can give intervals that are too narrow; with few clusters even cluster-robust tests can over-reject (Cameron, Gelbach and Miller 2008), and the percentile bootstrap used here is simpler than the wild cluster bootstrap-t of that paper. The exceptions are the adjusted gaps (normal intervals from the clustered regressions), the ANES intervals (a bootstrap over the states in the ANES sample), the band on the state scatter (a bootstrap over the plotted states) and the state intervals in its data table (linearised standard errors). Resampling counties instead of states gives a narrower interval around the ratio of the average gaps, 7.6. These intervals are model based and ignore the design of the online panel. Suppression: a cell needs at least 100 respondents and an effective sample of 100; the smallest cell behind an issue holds 7,157 respondents and none fell below the floor. The state-level check uses the ANES cumulative file for 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2024 (strong and not very strong partisans, respondents with a known state, weight VCF0009z) and the same estimator with deep states, a two-party margin of 20 points or more from the state returns.

## What these data cannot show

- The place gap is a difference between respondents who live in different counties.
- It is not an estimate of what a county does to a person.
- People choose where to live, and the respondents who live in deep-blue counties may differ from those in deep-red counties in ways that survey questions on education, race, age and gender do not capture.
- Mummolo and Nall ask why partisans do not sort more by place and study the constraints on political segregation [2].
- Earlier work on political context, from a 1984 survey in South Bend, Indiana, found that people build discussion networks that match their own views, that the political composition of their social context limits this, and that the interaction favors the local majority [3].
- A cross-section cannot separate influence from selection, and evidence on people who move is the design that can.
- Planned, Movers and opinion change (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/movers-and-opinion-change; planned) takes up that design.
- The party gap is not an estimate of what a party does to an opinion either.
- Party identification and issue positions shape each other, and party has taken on other identities, so a Democrat and a Republican also differ in race, religion and much else [4].
- The two gaps are also measured on 12 questions that were available in the survey, on guns, immigration, abortion, marriage, health care and climate.
- Their ratio would change with a different set of issues, and the ceiling of a share on a yes-or-no question limits how large a gap can be.
- The policy questions end in 2021, so the chapter says nothing about later years.
- The county is one level of place.
- A finer level, such as a neighborhood, could show larger place gaps, and a coarser one, such as the state, shows the ANES and CES gaps above.
- The chapter does not measure the variation in opinion among people who live in one place, which Planned, Variation in opinion within places (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/variation-in-opinion-within-places; planned) measures, or the share of partisans who live where their party loses, which Planned, Partisans in the other party's territory (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/partisans-outvoted-at-home; planned) measures.
- Place-specific contexts such as recent immigration may matter more for some issues than the county margin does, as Planned, Immigration and local context (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/immigration-and-local-context; planned) examines, and the change in a county's vote over time has its own accounting in Planned, Composition and behavior in county change (https://vishalsingh.org/politics/composition-and-behavior-in-county-change; planned).
- The intervals describe sampling variation in an opt-in online panel.
- They treat the states as an independent sample of clusters and the survey weights as correct, and they do not cover error from who joins the panel or from question wording.
- With few clusters, standard cluster-robust tests can over-reject [5], and the resampling method used here is simpler than the one that paper proposes.
- The ratio is uncertain where the place gap is small.

## References

1. Hopkins, Daniel J. (2018). The Increasingly United States: How and Why American Political Behavior Nationalized. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/I/bo27596045.html
2. Mummolo, Jonathan; Nall, Clayton (2017). Why Partisans Do Not Sort: The Constraints on Political Segregation. The Journal of Politics 79(1): 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1086/687569
3. Huckfeldt, Robert; Sprague, John (1987). Networks in Context: The Social Flow of Political Information. American Political Science Review 81(4): 1197-1216. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/networks-in-context-the-social-flow-of-political-information/393FFEC212ECE14C0E0F79715E086D60
4. Mason, Lilliana (2018). Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/U/bo27527354.html
5. Cameron, A. Colin; Gelbach, Jonah B.; Miller, Douglas L. (2008). Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors. The Review of Economics and Statistics 90(3): 414-427. https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article/90/3/414/57731/Bootstrap-Based-Improvements-for-Inference-with

## Provenance

- Pipeline version: 1.0.0
- Build script: book3/chapters/party-and-place/build.py (sha256 a4ecb5de36d0f1b0a07aa01f54170e898c2151cde9ed440d141ed61b040b4ef1)
- Built on: 2026-09-30
- Site commit: 16414b2c7257546a7042d0b1734657f208999f60

Inputs:

| File | Size (bytes) | SHA-256, first 1 MB | SHA-256, last 1 MB |
| --- | ---: | --- | --- |
| data/anes/anes_cdf_clean.parquet | 15,640,720 | b3f0c2d8ae5673b2c40cf6df71318ea3f712cd845c4f1aad0460f28d1b022643 | 04f06dae56b65649291caf6cf77aab9767d9c92d0c2669c6d3655d9063970583 |
| data/cces/cces_clean.parquet | 53,454,868 | 9430e88b3196c9ca2250bdda1908d3920e80e276ca0c529c514e2fc2bdd00806 | f61097c727c38fd8d7c8e53fe86935fb626f351a64d99ccb1ae0b56715b2c405 |
| data/county/pres_county_1868_2024.parquet | 6,295,675 | bec11c7a0cb5d4180bbd6809d048bc892dd00dfcdde527fa4da871b1dd3f835f | b2a4f000f2eea72d09af8939555289e924875cca40cd95ec8869104cd575bed7 |
| data/state/1976-2024-president.csv | 514,108 | 9936410a6dd4ecc8be7fe202c6dff5b5f8fee59d88f35ab542ed12879941dcb7 | 9936410a6dd4ecc8be7fe202c6dff5b5f8fee59d88f35ab542ed12879941dcb7 |

Outputs:

| File | SHA-256 |
| --- | --- |
| facts.json | c7aadf423f1ef59d59aaf7ee50ced06ff442b18ceb481acd2f7367548887cd27 |
| figures/anes_check.json | d1d3a380c95ac57c81f5fdb9f0221b0af50b732b5e35808a4d501ea844a7b701 |
| figures/bg_checks_by_party_id.json | 5a9f7e468b5675d68baed350e0397487032c532d19e67f5902cae8684ae713be |
| figures/definition_checks.json | 9530fe85714ea8d5fc97216fbaf33ef014afbfde852eb46f9f0398b0851b3586 |
| figures/gap_trend.json | 322b3363fcc157c5e250dd01e88290d133e31ddd4b8062e7eb384f0bdcba0240 |
| figures/gaps_by_issue.json | 100be0bddfa5d2c27e21156b7c6756cbf0049c929c6a46938f1b181c06efe0bb |
| figures/party_gap_change.json | 595f8060da049d02f77da7962123e44a9b5b58f31eb2d19212d156f6e9714a9f |
| figures/place_gap_by_party.json | 470941bae4a58e5b7c61da795ee1e879226794b77bd398365032a765e0e4a533 |
| figures/place_gap_by_party_id.json | f176b560c6e4152c46320c96939f78c0c5ddda2991bfe2fea14b570d603dc05e |
| figures/ratio_by_issue.json | f61572ce27dc5999b38e517e9cd31a4956f0ff770070d5d07e0193aef244126d |
| figures/state_party_gap.json | ff7f11f0608494aa0c414863bf5d974a1a7acaa404a28a75d89e0112f8434fc9 |
| figures/support_by_margin.json | 3ca5171f8dec09701f82d38b2b2a648ded7aacb286b854449379b311ea67cc47 |
| meta.json | 91c1795aaea5d404de24adc324bda6e9b3b4d2d95e36721b0f1c6802f09f2604 |
| refs.json | 06999dc144727ceab5ccfeefad2049838287acb9d56edda65dace53fcc5b1002 |

## Machine formats

- Report (HTML): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place/report
- Report (Markdown): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/party-and-place/report.md
- Every estimate (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/facts.json
- Table 1, figure "gaps_by_issue" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/gaps_by_issue.json
- Table 2, figure "ratio_by_issue" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/ratio_by_issue.json
- Table 3, figure "definition_checks" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/definition_checks.json
- Table 4, figure "support_by_margin" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/support_by_margin.json
- Table 5, figure "place_gap_by_party" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/place_gap_by_party.json
- Table 6, figure "place_gap_by_party_id" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/place_gap_by_party_id.json
- Table 7, figure "bg_checks_by_party_id" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/bg_checks_by_party_id.json
- Table 8, figure "gap_trend" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/gap_trend.json
- Table 9, figure "party_gap_change" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/party_gap_change.json
- Table 10, figure "anes_check" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/anes_check.json
- Table 11, figure "state_party_gap" (JSON): https://vishalsingh.org/politics/report/party-and-place/figures/state_party_gap.json
- Index of every report: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/llms.txt; all reports in one file: https://vishalsingh.org/politics/llms-full.txt