Effingham County, Illinois
Precinct data
Results by precinct
75 precincts · 18,807 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -BISHOPBISHOP | 124 | 887 | 34 | 1,045 | 11.9% | 84.9% | R+73.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -JACKSONJACKSON | 114 | 647 | 10 | 771 | 14.8% | 83.9% | R+69.1 |
| Precinct -ST FRANCISST FRANCIS | 96 | 654 | 13 | 763 | 12.6% | 85.7% | R+73.1 |
| Precinct -TEUTOPOLIS 2TEUTOPOLIS 2 | 102 | 582 | 11 | 695 | 14.7% | 83.7% | R+69.1 |
| Precinct -MASONMASON | 85 | 570 | 20 | 675 | 12.6% | 84.4% | R+71.9 |
| Precinct -MOUND 2MOUND 2 | 101 | 538 | 19 | 658 | 15.3% | 81.8% | R+66.4 |
| Precinct -WATSON 1WATSON 1 | 105 | 525 | 8 | 638 | 16.5% | 82.3% | R+65.8 |
| Precinct -MOUND 1MOUND 1 | 112 | 503 | 20 | 635 | 17.6% | 79.2% | R+61.6 |
| Precinct -WATSON 3WATSON 3 | 86 | 519 | 8 | 613 | 14.0% | 84.7% | R+70.6 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 06DOUGLAS 06 | 160 | 416 | 30 | 606 | 26.4% | 68.6% | R+42.2 |
| Precinct -SUMMIT 1SUMMIT 1 | 113 | 470 | 22 | 605 | 18.7% | 77.7% | R+59.0 |
| Precinct -SUMMIT 4SUMMIT 4 | 134 | 441 | 28 | 603 | 22.2% | 73.1% | R+50.9 |
| Precinct -SUMMIT 3SUMMIT 3 | 139 | 433 | 12 | 584 | 23.8% | 74.1% | R+50.3 |
| Precinct -TEUTOPOLIS 3TEUTOPOLIS 3 | 98 | 460 | 18 | 576 | 17.0% | 79.9% | R+62.8 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 14DOUGLAS 14 | 142 | 417 | 13 | 572 | 24.8% | 72.9% | R+48.1 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 01DOUGLAS 01 | 73 | 443 | 16 | 532 | 13.7% | 83.3% | R+69.5 |
| Precinct -MOUND 3MOUND 3 | 94 | 412 | 23 | 529 | 17.8% | 77.9% | R+60.1 |
| Precinct -WATSON 2WATSON 2 | 79 | 436 | 13 | 528 | 15.0% | 82.6% | R+67.6 |
| Precinct -TEUTOPOLIS 1TEUTOPOLIS 1 | 98 | 402 | 20 | 520 | 18.8% | 77.3% | R+58.5 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 03DOUGLAS 03 | 122 | 375 | 17 | 514 | 23.7% | 73.0% | R+49.2 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 07DOUGLAS 07 | 147 | 350 | 16 | 513 | 28.7% | 68.2% | R+39.6 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 04DOUGLAS 04 | 127 | 331 | 20 | 478 | 26.6% | 69.2% | R+42.7 |
| Precinct -SUMMIT 2SUMMIT 2 | 107 | 358 | 8 | 473 | 22.6% | 75.7% | R+53.1 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 05DOUGLAS 05 | 127 | 322 | 18 | 467 | 27.2% | 69.0% | R+41.8 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 13DOUGLAS 13 | 117 | 303 | 18 | 438 | 26.7% | 69.2% | R+42.5 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 12DOUGLAS 12 | 110 | 293 | 10 | 413 | 26.6% | 70.9% | R+44.3 |
| Precinct -LIBERTYLIBERTY | 58 | 316 | 7 | 381 | 15.2% | 82.9% | R+67.7 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 11DOUGLAS 11 | 124 | 235 | 12 | 371 | 33.4% | 63.3% | R+29.9 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 02DOUGLAS 02 | 79 | 269 | 11 | 359 | 22.0% | 74.9% | R+52.9 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 08DOUGLAS 08 | 90 | 245 | 15 | 350 | 25.7% | 70.0% | R+44.3 |
| Precinct -WESTWEST | 46 | 265 | 5 | 316 | 14.6% | 83.9% | R+69.3 |
| Precinct -MOCCASINMOCCASIN | 38 | 268 | 5 | 311 | 12.2% | 86.2% | R+74.0 |
| Precinct -LUCASLUCAS | 20 | 280 | 6 | 306 | 6.5% | 91.5% | R+85.0 |
| Precinct -BANNERBANNER | 37 | 238 | 0 | 275 | 13.5% | 86.5% | R+73.1 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 09DOUGLAS 09 | 75 | 162 | 6 | 243 | 30.9% | 66.7% | R+35.8 |
| Precinct -SUMMIT 5SUMMIT 5 | 36 | 184 | 6 | 226 | 15.9% | 81.4% | R+65.5 |
| Precinct -DOUGLAS 10DOUGLAS 10 | 62 | 159 | 4 | 225 | 27.6% | 70.7% | R+43.1 |
| BANNER Voting District17_1704900801 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| BISHOP Voting District17_1704901401 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 1 Voting District17_1704901101 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 10 Voting District17_1704901110 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 11 Voting District17_1704901111 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 12 Voting District17_1704901112 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 13 Voting District17_1704901113 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 14 Voting District17_1704901114 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 2 Voting District17_1704901102 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 3 Voting District17_1704901103 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 4 Voting District17_1704901104 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 5 Voting District17_1704901105 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 6 Voting District17_1704901106 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 7 Voting District17_1704901107 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 8 Voting District17_1704901108 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| DOUGLAS 9 Voting District17_1704901109 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| JACKSON Voting District17_1704900601 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| LIBERTY Voting District17_1704900401 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| LUCAS Voting District17_1704901301 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MASON 1 Voting District17_1704900501 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MASON 2 Voting District17_1704900502 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MOCCASIN Voting District17_1704900301 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MOUND 1 Voting District17_1704900201 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MOUND 2 Voting District17_1704900202 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| MOUND 3 Voting District17_1704900203 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Precinct -UNION NUNION N | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| ST FRANCIS 1 Voting District17_1704901501 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| ST FRANCIS 2 Voting District17_1704901502 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| SUMMIT 1 Voting District17_1704900701 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| SUMMIT 2 Voting District17_1704900702 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| TEUTOPOLIS 1 Voting District17_1704901201 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| TEUTOPOLIS 2 Voting District17_1704901202 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| TEUTOPOLIS 3 Voting District17_1704901203 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| UNION Voting District17_1704901001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| WATSON 1 Voting District17_1704900901 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| WATSON 2 Voting District17_1704900902 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| WATSON 3 Voting District17_1704900903 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| WEST Voting District17_1704900101 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | +28.5% |
| 1896 | +21.5% |
| 1900 | +23.1% |
| 1904 | +10.1% |
| 1908 | +19.6% |
| 1912 | +36.5% |
| 1916 | +16.7% |
| 1920 | −16.4% |
| 1924 | +8.1% |
| 1928 | +4.3% |
| 1932 | +37.3% |
| 1936 | +16.4% |
| 1940 | +0.4% |
| 1944 | −8.4% |
| 1948 | +1.2% |
| 1952 | −15.8% |
| 1956 | −21.5% |
| 1960 | −6.1% |
| 1964 | +14.7% |
| 1968 | −18.4% |
| 1972 | −32.8% |
| 1976 | −9.3% |
| 1980 | −35.3% |
| 1984 | −42.8% |
| 1988 | −29.7% |
| 1992 | −7.4% |
| 1996 | −20.2% |
| 2000 | −38.9% |
| 2004 | −45.4% |
| 2008 | −36.0% |
| 2012 | −52.0% |
| 2016 | −59.9% |
| 2020 | −59.2% |
| 2024 | −60.3% |
U.S. Senate
| Year | Won | Democratic | Republican | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | R | 20.1%3,190 | 78.3%12,409 | 15,842 |
| 2020 | R | 21.9%4,128 | 75.9%14,272 | 18,813 |
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 24,454 |
| 2018 | 24,648 |
| 2020 | 24,997 |
| 2022 | 24,771 |
| 2024 | 25,493 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−55 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −1,595 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $51,845 in average income, against $96,879 for residents who stayed — 46% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+57.1 on average — 3.2 points more Democratic-leaning than Effingham County, IL itself (R+60.3).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Fayette County, IL75R+64.7
- Shelby County, IL59R+60.2
- Coles County, IL53R+28.4
- Clay County, IL37R+67.3
- Cumberland County, IL36R+61.8
- Jasper County, IL28R+65.2
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Fayette County, IL66
- Shelby County, IL59
- Coles County, IL52
- Jasper County, IL29
- Clay County, IL26
- Cumberland County, IL24
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 | −53 |
| 2012 | −99 |
| 2013 | −135 |
| 2014 | −220 |
| 2015 | +5 |
| 2016 | −146 |
| 2017 | −201 |
| 2018 | −52 |
| 2019 | −273 |
| 2021 | −170 |
| 2022 | −212 |
| 2023 | +10 |
| 2024 | +6 |
| 2025 | −55 |
Effingham County, anchored by its small city of the same name at the crossroads of I-57 and I-70, delivered a 60-point Republican presidential margin in 2024—among the widest gaps in a state whose statewide results ran in the opposite direction.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 37.3 points in 1932 and a Republican high of 60.3 points in 2024. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 1.1 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 60.3 points.
A population of 34,522, a 94% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $80,404 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Auglaize County and Nemaha 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 →
Effingham County, Illinois. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/17049/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.