Gila County, Arizona
Precinct data
Results by precinct
78 precincts · 27,698 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Star ValleyStar Valley | 519 | 1,848 | 20 | 2,387 | 21.7% | 77.4% | R+55.7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Payson #3Payson #3 | 637 | 1,684 | 24 | 2,345 | 27.2% | 71.8% | R+44.6 |
| Precinct -Payson #2Payson #2 | 413 | 1,288 | 20 | 1,721 | 24.0% | 74.8% | R+50.8 |
| Precinct -Pine-Strawberry WestPine-Strawberry West | 447 | 1,159 | 18 | 1,624 | 27.5% | 71.4% | R+43.8 |
| Precinct -Payson #5Payson #5 | 376 | 1,182 | 15 | 1,573 | 23.9% | 75.1% | R+51.2 |
| Precinct -San CarlosSan Carlos | 955 | 329 | 6 | 1,290 | 74.0% | 25.5% | D+48.5 |
| Precinct -Payson #8Payson #8 | 335 | 896 | 11 | 1,242 | 27.0% | 72.1% | R+45.2 |
| Precinct -Tonto BasinTonto Basin | 208 | 1,001 | 4 | 1,213 | 17.1% | 82.5% | R+65.4 |
| Precinct -Payson #1Payson #1 | 300 | 895 | 15 | 1,210 | 24.8% | 74.0% | R+49.2 |
| Precinct -Payson #4Payson #4 | 290 | 721 | 15 | 1,026 | 28.3% | 70.3% | R+42.0 |
| Precinct -Payson #6Payson #6 | 240 | 749 | 13 | 1,002 | 24.0% | 74.8% | R+50.8 |
| Precinct -Payson #7Payson #7 | 208 | 577 | 9 | 794 | 26.2% | 72.7% | R+46.5 |
| Precinct -East GlobeEast Globe | 242 | 479 | 10 | 731 | 33.1% | 65.5% | R+32.4 |
| Precinct -Globe #6Globe #6 | 230 | 435 | 14 | 679 | 33.9% | 64.1% | R+30.2 |
| Precinct -Zane GreyZane Grey | 144 | 438 | 7 | 589 | 24.4% | 74.4% | R+49.9 |
| Precinct -Pine-Strawberry EastPine-Strawberry East | 160 | 415 | 4 | 579 | 27.6% | 71.7% | R+44.0 |
| Precinct -Claypool #1Claypool #1 | 147 | 411 | 6 | 564 | 26.1% | 72.9% | R+46.8 |
| Precinct -YoungYoung | 79 | 476 | 1 | 556 | 14.2% | 85.6% | R+71.4 |
| Precinct -Globe #11Globe #11 | 171 | 344 | 5 | 520 | 32.9% | 66.2% | R+33.3 |
| Precinct -Claypool #2Claypool #2 | 187 | 322 | 9 | 518 | 36.1% | 62.2% | R+26.1 |
| Precinct -Globe #1Globe #1 | 134 | 376 | 1 | 511 | 26.2% | 73.6% | R+47.4 |
| Precinct -GiselaGisela | 113 | 367 | 6 | 486 | 23.3% | 75.5% | R+52.3 |
| Precinct -Globe #4Globe #4 | 188 | 252 | 10 | 450 | 41.8% | 56.0% | R+14.2 |
| Precinct -Canyon DayCanyon Day | 358 | 75 | 7 | 440 | 81.4% | 17.0% | D+64.3 |
| Precinct -Copper BasinCopper Basin | 268 | 155 | 3 | 426 | 62.9% | 36.4% | D+26.5 |
| Precinct -Globe #8Globe #8 | 167 | 233 | 3 | 403 | 41.4% | 57.8% | R+16.4 |
| Precinct -Globe #7Globe #7 | 109 | 220 | 6 | 335 | 32.5% | 65.7% | R+33.1 |
| Precinct -Central HeightsCentral Heights | 100 | 230 | 2 | 332 | 30.1% | 69.3% | R+39.2 |
| Precinct -Miami #1Miami #1 | 137 | 189 | 5 | 331 | 41.4% | 57.1% | R+15.7 |
| Precinct -Miami #3Miami #3 | 149 | 173 | 5 | 327 | 45.6% | 52.9% | R+7.3 |
| Precinct -Claypool #3Claypool #3 | 141 | 163 | 5 | 309 | 45.6% | 52.8% | R+7.1 |
| Precinct -Whispering PinesWhispering Pines | 50 | 175 | 4 | 229 | 21.8% | 76.4% | R+54.6 |
| Precinct -RooseveltRoosevelt | 47 | 170 | 0 | 217 | 21.7% | 78.3% | R+56.7 |
| Precinct -Pinal CreekPinal Creek | 80 | 130 | 3 | 213 | 37.6% | 61.0% | R+23.5 |
| Precinct -Globe #2Globe #2 | 70 | 106 | 2 | 178 | 39.3% | 59.6% | R+20.2 |
| Precinct -WheatfieldsWheatfields | 33 | 84 | 1 | 118 | 28.0% | 71.2% | R+43.2 |
| Precinct -Sierra AnchaSierra Ancha | 19 | 98 | 0 | 117 | 16.2% | 83.8% | R+67.5 |
| Precinct -Globe #3Globe #3 | 37 | 51 | 3 | 91 | 40.7% | 56.0% | R+15.4 |
| Precinct -CarrizoCarrizo | 16 | 5 | 1 | 22 | 72.7% | 22.7% | D+50.0 |
| Canyon Day Voting District04_0400711 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Carrizo Voting District04_0400740 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Central Heights Voting District04_0400716 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Christmas Voting District04_0400722 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Claypool #1 Voting District04_0400717 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Claypool #2 Voting District04_0400718 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Claypool #3 Voting District04_0400715 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| East Globe Voting District04_0400707 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Gisela Voting District04_0400737 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #1 Voting District04_0400701 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #11 Voting District04_0400712 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #2 Voting District04_0400702 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #3 Voting District04_0400703 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #4 Voting District04_0400704 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #5 Voting District04_0400705 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #6 Voting District04_0400706 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #7 Voting District04_0400708 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Globe #8 Voting District04_0400709 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hayden Voting District04_0400720 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Miami #1 Voting District04_0400713 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Miami #3 Voting District04_0400714 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #1 Voting District04_0400726 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #2 Voting District04_0400727 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #3 Voting District04_0400728 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #4 Voting District04_0400729 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #5 Voting District04_0400733 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #6 Voting District04_0400730 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #7 Voting District04_0400731 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Payson #8 Voting District04_0400732 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Pine-Strawberry Voting District04_0400739 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Roosevelt Voting District04_0400723 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| San Carlos Voting District04_0400710 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Sierra Ancha Voting District04_0400724 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Star Valley Voting District04_0400734 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Tonto Basin Voting District04_0400725 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Whispering Pines Voting District04_0400735 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Winkelman Voting District04_0400721 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Young Voting District04_0400738 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Zane Grey Voting District04_0400736 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
Presidential margin, 1912–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1912 | +27.8% |
| 1916 | +38.2% |
| 1920 | −6.7% |
| 1924 | +0.4% |
| 1928 | −1.4% |
| 1932 | +41.1% |
| 1936 | +50.7% |
| 1940 | +37.2% |
| 1944 | +36.0% |
| 1948 | +33.7% |
| 1952 | +13.3% |
| 1956 | −2.5% |
| 1960 | +15.9% |
| 1964 | +29.5% |
| 1968 | +12.6% |
| 1972 | −13.3% |
| 1976 | +10.9% |
| 1980 | −17.4% |
| 1984 | −13.3% |
| 1988 | −4.7% |
| 1992 | +9.7% |
| 1996 | +12.5% |
| 2000 | −8.2% |
| 2004 | −19.3% |
| 2008 | −27.8% |
| 2012 | −26.7% |
| 2016 | −31.9% |
| 2020 | −34.0% |
| 2024 | −37.6% |
U.S. Senate
Registered voters
By party of registration, over time
Registration leans Republican; the presidential vote runs 10 points more Democratic.
34,258 registered voters · 2026
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+136 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +4,597 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $69,345 in average income, against $65,556 for residents who stayed — 6% higher. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+5.7 on average — 32 points more Democratic-leaning than Gila County, AZ itself (R+37.6).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Maricopa County, AZ627R+3.5
- Pinal County, AZ117R+22.1
- Pima County, AZ48D+15.2
- Navajo County, AZ35R+17.2
- Yavapai County, AZ33R+33.9
- Coconino County, AZ30D+19.9
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Maricopa County, AZ476
- Pinal County, AZ110
- Navajo County, AZ53
- Yavapai County, AZ40
- Pima County, AZ38
- Graham County, AZ23
Migration is one input to a place’s political change, not its cause — a shift can also come from residents changing their minds, generational turnover, or turnout. These figures describe the places people moved between; they do not measure how any mover voted.
| Year | Net domestic migration |
|---|---|
| 2011 | −110 |
| 2012 | −361 |
| 2013 | +52 |
| 2014 | +134 |
| 2015 | +89 |
| 2016 | +588 |
| 2017 | +417 |
| 2018 | +456 |
| 2019 | +504 |
| 2021 | +764 |
| 2022 | +892 |
| 2023 | +572 |
| 2024 | +464 |
| 2025 | +136 |
Gila County's economy has long centered on mining and ranching in the Mogollon Rim highlands, and its rural, majority-Hispanic and Native American precincts nonetheless produce some of Arizona's widest Republican presidential margins.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 50.7 points in 1936 and a Republican high of 37.6 points in 2024. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 3.6 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 37.6 points.
A population of 53,795, a 61% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $61,986 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of La Paz County and Mohave County.
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Twin score (0–100) = weighted cosine between tier-standardized fingerprints: presidential margins 2000–2024 with 12-yr trend and elasticity, ACS income, age, education, population and race, top reported ancestries, and religious adherence — chips name the closest-shared dimensions and the widest gap. Re-weight the groups in the twins explorer.
Browse places by community — income, education, race & ethnicity, language — all community cuts →
Compare two places, side by side
Twelve curated comparisons line up election history, demographics, and the divergence story for two places at a glance. Browse all comparisons →
Gila County, Arizona. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/04007/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.