Newton County, Mississippi
Precinct data
Results by precinct
36 precincts · 9,323 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -HickoryHickory | 280 | 827 | 9 | 1,116 | 25.1% | 74.1% | R+49.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -LawrenceLawrence | 311 | 618 | 8 | 937 | 33.2% | 66.0% | R+32.8 |
| Precinct -Newton #4Newton #4 | 384 | 490 | 13 | 887 | 43.3% | 55.2% | R+12.0 |
| Precinct -Newton #1Newton #1 | 608 | 75 | 6 | 689 | 88.2% | 10.9% | D+77.4 |
| Precinct -Little RockLittle Rock | 31 | 647 | 5 | 683 | 4.5% | 94.7% | R+90.2 |
| Precinct -Decatur #1Decatur #1 | 196 | 458 | 5 | 659 | 29.7% | 69.5% | R+39.8 |
| Precinct -DuffeeDuffee | 41 | 505 | 3 | 549 | 7.5% | 92.0% | R+84.5 |
| Precinct -Decatur #3Decatur #3 | 82 | 422 | 3 | 507 | 16.2% | 83.2% | R+67.1 |
| Precinct -Union # 2Union # 2 | 69 | 413 | 4 | 486 | 14.2% | 85.0% | R+70.8 |
| Precinct -Newton #5Newton #5 | 203 | 259 | 9 | 471 | 43.1% | 55.0% | R+11.9 |
| Precinct -ChunkyChunky | 31 | 394 | 5 | 430 | 7.2% | 91.6% | R+84.4 |
| Precinct -ConehattaConehatta | 115 | 299 | 2 | 416 | 27.6% | 71.9% | R+44.2 |
| Precinct -ProspectProspect | 19 | 384 | 2 | 405 | 4.7% | 94.8% | R+90.1 |
| Precinct -Decatur #2Decatur #2 | 53 | 349 | 0 | 402 | 13.2% | 86.8% | R+73.6 |
| Precinct -Union # 3Union # 3 | 37 | 283 | 2 | 322 | 11.5% | 87.9% | R+76.4 |
| Precinct -Union # 1Union # 1 | 136 | 136 | 2 | 274 | 49.6% | 49.6% | Even |
| Precinct -Decatur #5Decatur #5 | 7 | 82 | 1 | 90 | 7.8% | 91.1% | R+83.3 |
| Chapel Hill Voting District28_28101203 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Chunky Voting District28_28101501 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Conehatta Voting District28_28101303 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Decatur 1 Voting District28_28101102 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Decatur 1-A Voting District28_28101103 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Duffee Voting District28_28101202 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hazel Voting District28_28101403 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Hickory Voting District28_28101502 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Lawrence Voting District28_28101401 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Liberty Voting District28_28101503 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Little Rock Voting District28_28101204 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Newton 1 Voting District28_28101104 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Newton 4 Voting District28_28101402 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Newton 5 Voting District28_28101504 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Prospect Voting District28_28101304 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Scanlan Voting District28_28101302 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Union 1 Voting District28_28101101 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Union 2 Voting District28_28101201 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| Union 3 Voting District28_28101301 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | +83.8% |
| 1896 | +97.7% |
| 1900 | +97.1% |
| 1904 | +94.4% |
| 1908 | +91.7% |
| 1912 | +94.2% |
| 1916 | +93.4% |
| 1920 | +78.7% |
| 1924 | +87.0% |
| 1928 | +69.9% |
| 1932 | +94.7% |
| 1936 | +97.0% |
| 1940 | +96.7% |
| 1944 | +95.6% |
| 1948 | +4.9% |
| 1952 | +48.6% |
| 1956 | +63.9% |
| 1960 | +12.0% |
| 1964 | −90.4% |
| 1968 | +3.7% |
| 1972 | −78.6% |
| 1976 | −16.0% |
| 1980 | −10.9% |
| 1984 | −46.9% |
| 1988 | −41.6% |
| 1992 | −38.2% |
| 1996 | −29.9% |
| 2000 | −43.8% |
| 2004 | −45.8% |
| 2008 | −34.1% |
| 2012 | −31.5% |
| 2016 | −40.2% |
| 2020 | −38.5% |
| 2024 | −43.3% |
U.S. Senate
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 14,517 |
| 2018 | 14,589 |
| 2020 | 14,944 |
| 2022 | 14,123 |
| 2024 | 14,278 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−74 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −1,186 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $39,452 in average income, against $56,242 for residents who stayed — 30% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+33.8 on average — 9.5 points more Democratic-leaning than Newton County, MS itself (R+43.3).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Neshoba County, MS81R+50.9
- Scott County, MS75R+24.0
- Lauderdale County, MS72R+21.2
- Rankin County, MS20R+47.1
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Neshoba County, MS82
- Lauderdale County, MS63
- Scott County, MS50
- Rankin County, MS23
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 | −336 |
| 2012 | 0 |
| 2013 | +45 |
| 2014 | +178 |
| 2015 | −129 |
| 2016 | −126 |
| 2017 | −86 |
| 2018 | −99 |
| 2019 | −351 |
| 2021 | −150 |
| 2022 | −59 |
| 2023 | −3 |
| 2024 | +4 |
| 2025 | −74 |
Newton County sits in Mississippi's central hill country with a population just under 22,000, and its 2024 presidential margin of R+43 reflects a pattern of lopsided Republican support that has defined the county for over a decade.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 97.7 points in 1896 and a Republican high of 90.4 points in 1964. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 4.8 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 43.3 points.
A population of 21,093, a 60% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $50,540 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Neshoba County and Clarke 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 →
Newton County, Mississippi. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/28101/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.