- Lead
- 5,973
- Total
- 12,450
- vs nation
- R+46.5
- Turnout
- 58.1%
Clinton County, IN
▦ precinct · ▥ counties · ▢ no spatial detail
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 58.1% of 21,798 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 5,973
- Total
- 12,949
- vs nation
- R+50.6
- Turnout
- 60.2%
- Lead
- 5,712
- Total
- 11,991
- vs nation
- R+49.7
- Turnout
- 65.7%
- Lead
- 3,030
- Total
- 9,883
- vs nation
- R+34.5
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,612
- Total
- 12,392
- vs nation
- R+20.3
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 5,136
- Total
- 11,877
- vs nation
- R+40.8
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 3,498
- Total
- 10,991
- vs nation
- R+32.3
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 2,207
- Total
- 11,571
- vs nation
- R+27.6
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+48.0MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 32,9442024 5-year
- Population density
- 81 / sq mi2024 5-year · TIGER/Line
- Land area
- 405 sq miTIGER/Line
- Median household income
- $65,0192024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 77.8%2024 5-year
- Black
- 0.5%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 19.5%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+15.0 in 1912MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+48.0 in 2024MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Cass County, IN · twin score 93.3
Turnout and midterm durability
Participation measured against the same-year citizen voting-age population. Audited cycles count total general-election participants — ballots or participating voters, not presidential candidate votes. Cycles before 2016 predate that series and are derived from the certified presidential returns instead; they are marked everywhere they appear and are excluded from the figures below.
- 2024 turnout
- 58.1%12,675 participants ÷ 21,798 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +26.7 ptsPresidential-dependent
- Drop-off vs state
- +1.6 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026
- 31.4%–40.7%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
Select a presidential cycle to show it on the map and results ledger above.
| Cycle | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Series | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12,675 | 21,798 ± 309 | 58.1% | Audited | A/A | |
| 2022Mid | 7,465 | 22,311 ± 303 | 33.5% | Audited | A/A |
| 13,234 | 21,982 ± 244 | 60.2% | Audited | A/A | |
| 2018Mid | 12,798 | 22,237 ± 246 | 57.6% | Audited | A/A |
| 14,691 | 22,377 ± 238 | 65.7% | Audited | A/A | |
| 9,883 | 22,672 | 43.6% | Derived | — | |
| 12,392 | 23,283 | 53.2% | Derived | — | |
| 11,877 | 23,894 extrapolated | 49.7% | Derived | — |
Sources and methods
Audited cycles (2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2024) count total general-election participants against the same-year CVAP special tabulation, each cell carrying its own numerator and denominator quality grade. Derived cycles (2004, 2008, 2012) come from the certified presidential returns on this page over the ACS 5-year CVAP series, so they measure presidential votes cast rather than ballots — a floor on participation. Where a derived cycle predates the ACS its denominator is extrapolated rather than read, and says so on its own line below. They are shown for the longer arc and are excluded from the drop-off, excess-drop-off, and 2026 scenario figures above.
- 2024: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 311/228.
- 2022: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 306/183.
- 2020: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 301/2.
- 2018: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 297/138.
- 2016: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 293/111.
- 2012 (derived): Certified presidential returns · ACS 5-year CVAP (B05003); presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count.
- 2008 (derived): Certified presidential returns · ACS 5-year CVAP (B05003); presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count.
- 2004 (derived): Certified presidential returns · extrapolated CVAP denominator; presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count; 2004 predates the ACS, so the denominator is a linear back-extrapolation from the 2008 and 2012 CVAP values, not a read figure.
Interactive election map
One map. Every available contest.
The map and local result cover Clinton County only. The complete district District 4 result is shown below for comparison.
Clinton County result
0 precinct units · 0 candidate votes
Show all 8 candidates
District District 4 result
Loading the complete contest result…
Explore precinct resultsSearch, sort, compare years, or export CSV · 78 precincts
Precinct data
Results by precinct
78 precincts · 12,450 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -PRECINCT 34PRECINCT 34 | 169 | 498 | 9 | 676 | 25.0% | 73.7% | R+48.7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -PRECINCT 30PRECINCT 30 | 103 | 490 | 10 | 603 | 17.1% | 81.3% | R+64.2 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 35PRECINCT 35 | 93 | 489 | 17 | 599 | 15.5% | 81.6% | R+66.1 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 28PRECINCT 28 | 151 | 358 | 9 | 518 | 29.2% | 69.1% | R+40.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 37PRECINCT 37 | 131 | 365 | 12 | 508 | 25.8% | 71.9% | R+46.1 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 39PRECINCT 39 | 119 | 380 | 3 | 502 | 23.7% | 75.7% | R+52.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 27PRECINCT 27 | 149 | 322 | 12 | 483 | 30.8% | 66.7% | R+35.8 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 20PRECINCT 20 | 107 | 352 | 6 | 465 | 23.0% | 75.7% | R+52.7 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 31PRECINCT 31 | 106 | 331 | 9 | 446 | 23.8% | 74.2% | R+50.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 14PRECINCT 14 | 129 | 253 | 6 | 388 | 33.2% | 65.2% | R+32.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 33PRECINCT 33 | 70 | 312 | 2 | 384 | 18.2% | 81.3% | R+63.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 21PRECINCT 21 | 61 | 307 | 5 | 373 | 16.4% | 82.3% | R+66.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 19PRECINCT 19 | 104 | 254 | 5 | 363 | 28.7% | 70.0% | R+41.3 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 23PRECINCT 23 | 73 | 284 | 4 | 361 | 20.2% | 78.7% | R+58.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 15PRECINCT 15 | 105 | 224 | 7 | 336 | 31.3% | 66.7% | R+35.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 12PRECINCT 12 | 109 | 217 | 9 | 335 | 32.5% | 64.8% | R+32.2 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 18PRECINCT 18 | 98 | 228 | 2 | 328 | 29.9% | 69.5% | R+39.6 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 26PRECINCT 26 | 74 | 243 | 6 | 323 | 22.9% | 75.2% | R+52.3 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 32PRECINCT 32 | 76 | 224 | 6 | 306 | 24.8% | 73.2% | R+48.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 38PRECINCT 38 | 42 | 254 | 5 | 301 | 14.0% | 84.4% | R+70.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 25PRECINCT 25 | 69 | 223 | 5 | 297 | 23.2% | 75.1% | R+51.9 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 22PRECINCT 22 | 42 | 238 | 4 | 284 | 14.8% | 83.8% | R+69.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 17PRECINCT 17 | 98 | 171 | 7 | 276 | 35.5% | 62.0% | R+26.4 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 04PRECINCT 04 | 73 | 187 | 5 | 265 | 27.5% | 70.6% | R+43.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 36PRECINCT 36 | 42 | 202 | 5 | 249 | 16.9% | 81.1% | R+64.3 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 08PRECINCT 08 | 70 | 170 | 4 | 244 | 28.7% | 69.7% | R+41.0 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 16PRECINCT 16 | 78 | 158 | 3 | 239 | 32.6% | 66.1% | R+33.5 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 13PRECINCT 13 | 58 | 167 | 1 | 226 | 25.7% | 73.9% | R+48.2 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 09PRECINCT 09 | 92 | 105 | 2 | 199 | 46.2% | 52.8% | R+6.5 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 06PRECINCT 06 | 52 | 141 | 2 | 195 | 26.7% | 72.3% | R+45.6 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 05PRECINCT 05 | 57 | 129 | 3 | 189 | 30.2% | 68.3% | R+38.1 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 24PRECINCT 24 | 44 | 141 | 2 | 187 | 23.5% | 75.4% | R+51.9 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 29PRECINCT 29 | 36 | 135 | 0 | 171 | 21.1% | 78.9% | R+57.9 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 02PRECINCT 02 | 42 | 113 | 2 | 157 | 26.8% | 72.0% | R+45.2 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 03PRECINCT 03 | 40 | 113 | 2 | 155 | 25.8% | 72.9% | R+47.1 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 11PRECINCT 11 | 49 | 99 | 4 | 152 | 32.2% | 65.1% | R+32.9 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 07PRECINCT 07 | 48 | 98 | 5 | 151 | 31.8% | 64.9% | R+33.1 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 01PRECINCT 01 | 58 | 81 | 6 | 145 | 40.0% | 55.9% | R+15.9 |
| Precinct -PRECINCT 10PRECINCT 10 | 18 | 52 | 1 | 71 | 25.4% | 73.2% | R+47.9 |
| PRECINCT 0118_1802300010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0218_1802300020 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0318_1802300030 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0418_1802300040 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0518_1802300050 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0618_1802300060 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0718_1802300070 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0818_1802300080 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 0918_1802300090 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1018_1802300100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1118_1802300110 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1218_1802300120 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1318_1802300130 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1418_1802300140 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1518_1802300150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1618_1802300160 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1718_1802300170 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1818_1802300180 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 1918_1802300190 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2018_1802300200 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2118_1802300210 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2218_1802300220 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2318_1802300230 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2418_1802300240 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2518_1802300250 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2618_1802300260 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2718_1802300270 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2818_1802300280 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 2918_1802300290 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3018_1802300300 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3118_1802300310 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3218_1802300320 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3318_1802300330 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3418_1802300340 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3518_1802300350 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3618_1802300360 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3718_1802300370 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3818_1802300380 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| PRECINCT 3918_1802300390 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
presidential history
Party record book
Clinton County, IN · the strongest Democratic and Republican presidential performances recorded here, measured three ways.
1892–2024 · 34 presidential cycles
Highest vote share
Largest share of the presidential candidate vote cast here.
Democratic
Franklin D. Roosevelt1932
56.3%
8,314 votes · D+13.7
Runner-up · Lyndon B. Johnson, 1964 · 53.6%
Republican
Donald Trump2024
73.2%
9,108 votes · R+48.0
Runner-up · Donald Trump, 2020 · 72.1%
Most votes
Largest number of votes cast for the party’s presidential nominee here.
Democratic
Lyndon B. Johnson1964
8,353votes
53.6% of the vote · D+7.7
Runner-up · Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1936 · 8,340 votes
Republican
Dwight D. Eisenhower1952
10,057votes
60.1% of the vote · R+21.5
Runner-up · Richard Nixon, 1972 · 9,849 votes
Best relative to the U.S.
This Place’s margin against the national margin in the same election — positive when it leaned toward the party more than the country did.
Democratic
James M. Cox1920
+19.3pts D vs U.S.
Place R+6.9 · U.S. R+26.2
Runner-up · John W. Davis, 1924 · +15.1 pts
Republican
Donald Trump2020
+50.6pts R vs U.S.
Place R+46.1 · U.S. D+4.5
Runner-up · Donald Trump, 2016 · +49.7 pts
Current officeholders
Seats representing Clinton County, IN. A county elects none of these itself — they are the members for the 1 congressional, 1 state senate and 2 state house districts it falls inside, so parts of the county are represented by different members.
Senate and governor results are in the Office selector at the top of this page.
U.S. House
Each row shows U.S. House votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
| Year | Vote lead | Democratic | Republican | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | R | 26.1%3,311 | 73.9%9,399 | 12,710 |
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 20,357 |
| 2018 | 18,609 |
| 2020 | 19,911 |
| 2022 | 20,366 |
| 2024 | 20,350 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−154 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −2,353 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $49,071 in average income, against $64,248 for residents who stayed — 24% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+8.3 on average — 40 points more Democratic-leaning than Clinton County, IN itself (R+48.0).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Tippecanoe County, IN219R+0.1
- Boone County, IN73R+16.0
- Marion County, IN45D+27.6
- Hamilton County, IN44R+6.1
- Carroll County, IN42R+52.1
- Howard County, IN40R+35.3
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Tippecanoe County, IN199
- Boone County, IN92
- Marion County, IN58
- Howard County, IN56
- Carroll County, IN42
- Hamilton County, IN40
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 | −303 |
| 2012 | −230 |
| 2013 | −222 |
| 2014 | −385 |
| 2015 | −189 |
| 2016 | −252 |
| 2017 | −92 |
| 2018 | −80 |
| 2019 | +87 |
| 2021 | −149 |
| 2022 | −156 |
| 2023 | −53 |
| 2024 | −175 |
| 2025 | −154 |
Clinton County delivered a 48-point Republican presidential margin in 2024, reflecting the heavily rural, small-town character of a north-central Indiana county where Frankfort anchors an otherwise agricultural landscape.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 15.0 points in 1912 and a Republican high of 48.0 points in 2024. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 1.8 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 48.0 points.
A population of 32,944, a 78% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $65,019 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Cass County and Marshall 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 →
Clinton County, Indiana. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/18023/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.