Yellow Medicine County, Minnesota
Precinct data
Results by precinct
61 precincts · 5,410 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -GRANITE FALLS W-1GRANITE FALLS W-1 | 392 | 556 | 25 | 973 | 40.3% | 57.1% | R+16.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -CANBYCANBY | 278 | 568 | 25 | 871 | 31.9% | 65.2% | R+33.3 |
| Precinct -CLARKFIELDCLARKFIELD | 102 | 275 | 9 | 386 | 26.4% | 71.2% | R+44.8 |
| Precinct -STONY RUN TWPSTONY RUN TWP | 84 | 184 | 6 | 274 | 30.7% | 67.2% | R+36.5 |
| Precinct -MINNESOTA FALLS TWPMINNESOTA FALLS TWP | 87 | 120 | 8 | 215 | 40.5% | 55.8% | R+15.3 |
| Precinct -WOOD LAKEWOOD LAKE | 56 | 140 | 6 | 202 | 27.7% | 69.3% | R+41.6 |
| Precinct -NORMAN TWPNORMAN TWP | 22 | 134 | 2 | 158 | 13.9% | 84.8% | R+70.9 |
| Precinct -SANDNES TWPSANDNES TWP | 34 | 110 | 1 | 145 | 23.4% | 75.9% | R+52.4 |
| Precinct -SIOUX AGENCY TWPSIOUX AGENCY TWP | 32 | 109 | 4 | 145 | 22.1% | 75.2% | R+53.1 |
| Precinct -WOOD LAKE TWPWOOD LAKE TWP | 27 | 115 | 1 | 143 | 18.9% | 80.4% | R+61.5 |
| Precinct -POSEN TWPPOSEN TWP | 15 | 126 | 1 | 142 | 10.6% | 88.7% | R+78.2 |
| Precinct -OSHKOSH TWPOSHKOSH TWP | 30 | 106 | 3 | 139 | 21.6% | 76.3% | R+54.7 |
| Precinct -ECHOECHO | 36 | 89 | 1 | 126 | 28.6% | 70.6% | R+42.1 |
| Precinct -HAZEL RUN TWPHAZEL RUN TWP | 20 | 101 | 4 | 125 | 16.0% | 80.8% | R+64.8 |
| Precinct -FRIENDSHIP TWPFRIENDSHIP TWP | 31 | 90 | 2 | 123 | 25.2% | 73.2% | R+48.0 |
| Precinct -HAMMER TWPHAMMER TWP | 30 | 82 | 6 | 118 | 25.4% | 69.5% | R+44.1 |
| Precinct -LISBON TWPLISBON TWP | 39 | 74 | 3 | 116 | 33.6% | 63.8% | R+30.2 |
| Precinct -NORMANIA TWPNORMANIA TWP | 23 | 87 | 1 | 111 | 20.7% | 78.4% | R+57.7 |
| Precinct -WERGELAND TWPWERGELAND TWP | 26 | 71 | 1 | 98 | 26.5% | 72.4% | R+45.9 |
| Precinct -HANLEY FALLSHANLEY FALLS | 25 | 69 | 2 | 96 | 26.0% | 71.9% | R+45.8 |
| Precinct -TYRO TWPTYRO TWP | 24 | 71 | 1 | 96 | 25.0% | 74.0% | R+49.0 |
| Precinct -PORTERPORTER | 25 | 62 | 4 | 91 | 27.5% | 68.1% | R+40.7 |
| Precinct -BURTON TWPBURTON TWP | 11 | 78 | 1 | 90 | 12.2% | 86.7% | R+74.4 |
| Precinct -ECHO TWPECHO TWP | 15 | 70 | 4 | 89 | 16.9% | 78.7% | R+61.8 |
| Precinct -SWEDE PRAIRIE TWPSWEDE PRAIRIE TWP | 26 | 57 | 0 | 83 | 31.3% | 68.7% | R+37.3 |
| Precinct -OMRO TWPOMRO TWP | 16 | 55 | 1 | 72 | 22.2% | 76.4% | R+54.2 |
| Precinct -FLORIDA TWPFLORIDA TWP | 20 | 51 | 0 | 71 | 28.2% | 71.8% | R+43.7 |
| Precinct -FORTIER TWPFORTIER TWP | 8 | 46 | 0 | 54 | 14.8% | 85.2% | R+70.4 |
| Precinct -ST LEOST LEO | 6 | 32 | 1 | 39 | 15.4% | 82.1% | R+66.7 |
| Precinct -HAZEL RUNHAZEL RUN | 8 | 10 | 1 | 19 | 42.1% | 52.6% | R+10.5 |
| Burton Twp. Voting District27_271730005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Canby W-127_271730010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Canby W-227_271730015 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Clarkfield Voting District27_271730020 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Echo Twp. Voting District27_271730030 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Echo Voting District27_271730025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Florida Twp. Voting District27_271730035 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Fortier Twp. Voting District27_271730040 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Friendship Twp. Voting District27_271730045 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Granite Falls W-127_271730050 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hammer Twp. Voting District27_271730065 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hanley Falls Voting District27_271730070 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hazel Run Twp. Voting District27_271730080 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hazel Run Voting District27_271730075 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Lisbon Twp. Voting District27_271730085 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Minnesota Falls Twp. Voting District27_271730090 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Norman Twp. Voting District27_271730095 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Normania Twp. Voting District27_271730100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Omro Twp. Voting District27_271730105 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Oshkosh Twp. Voting District27_271730110 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Porter Voting District27_271730115 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Posen Twp. Voting District27_271730120 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Sandnes Twp. Voting District27_271730130 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Sioux Agency Twp. Voting District27_271730135 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| St. Leo Voting District27_271730125 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Stony Run Twp. Voting District27_271730140 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Swede Prairie Twp. Voting District27_271730145 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Tyro Twp. Voting District27_271730150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Wergeland Twp. Voting District27_271730155 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Wood Lake Twp. Voting District27_271730165 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Wood Lake Voting District27_271730160 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −29.5% |
| 1896 | −21.0% |
| 1900 | −37.1% |
| 1904 | −72.4% |
| 1908 | −35.8% |
| 1912 | +15.6% |
| 1916 | −8.8% |
| 1920 | −58.5% |
| 1924 | −36.1% |
| 1928 | −7.1% |
| 1932 | +44.1% |
| 1936 | +28.3% |
| 1940 | −2.3% |
| 1944 | −1.9% |
| 1948 | +21.0% |
| 1952 | −15.7% |
| 1956 | −2.5% |
| 1960 | −2.0% |
| 1964 | +26.2% |
| 1968 | +7.5% |
| 1972 | −3.0% |
| 1976 | +18.6% |
| 1980 | −15.8% |
| 1984 | −11.6% |
| 1988 | +5.7% |
| 1992 | +11.0% |
| 1996 | +13.1% |
| 2000 | −1.3% |
| 2004 | −1.4% |
| 2008 | +4.3% |
| 2012 | −6.3% |
| 2016 | −35.2% |
| 2020 | −37.0% |
| 2024 | −40.5% |
U.S. Senate
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 6,283 |
| 2018 | 6,046 |
| 2020 | 6,261 |
| 2022 | 5,962 |
| 2024 | 6,253 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−47 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −938 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $44,019 in average income, against $102,304 for residents who stayed — 57% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+33.0 on average — 7.5 points more Democratic-leaning than Yellow Medicine County, MN itself (R+40.5).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Chippewa County, MN34R+34.0
- Lyon County, MN27R+31.7
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Lyon County, MN41
- Chippewa County, MN36
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 | −117 |
| 2012 | −129 |
| 2013 | −71 |
| 2014 | −98 |
| 2015 | −145 |
| 2016 | +36 |
| 2017 | −42 |
| 2018 | −58 |
| 2019 | −104 |
| 2021 | −62 |
| 2022 | +37 |
| 2023 | −32 |
| 2024 | −106 |
| 2025 | −47 |
Yellow Medicine County in southwest Minnesota has moved decisively toward Republican presidential candidates over the past two decades, posting a 40-point margin in 2024 — a striking turn for a rural agricultural county that once leaned competitive.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 44.1 points in 1932 and a Republican high of 72.4 points in 1904. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 3.5 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 40.5 points.
A population of 9,451, a 87% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $74,000 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Faribault County and Chippewa 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 →
Yellow Medicine County, Minnesota. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/27173/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.