Galveston County, Texas
Precinct data
Results by precinct
90 precincts · 158,996 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Precinct 357Precinct 357 | 918 | 2,475 | 47 | 3,440 | 26.7% | 71.9% | R+45.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Precinct 354Precinct 354 | 1,248 | 1,957 | 75 | 3,280 | 38.0% | 59.7% | R+21.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 420Precinct 420 | 1,066 | 2,093 | 31 | 3,190 | 33.4% | 65.6% | R+32.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 137Precinct 137 | 937 | 2,149 | 27 | 3,113 | 30.1% | 69.0% | R+38.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 353Precinct 353 | 1,066 | 1,968 | 45 | 3,079 | 34.6% | 63.9% | R+29.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 388Precinct 388 | 1,016 | 2,016 | 43 | 3,075 | 33.0% | 65.6% | R+32.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 480Precinct 480 | 1,255 | 1,745 | 28 | 3,028 | 41.4% | 57.6% | R+16.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 461Precinct 461 | 711 | 2,227 | 46 | 2,984 | 23.8% | 74.6% | R+50.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 278Precinct 278 | 437 | 2,524 | 21 | 2,982 | 14.7% | 84.6% | R+70.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 333Precinct 333 | 959 | 1,913 | 66 | 2,938 | 32.6% | 65.1% | R+32.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 390Precinct 390 | 943 | 1,879 | 42 | 2,864 | 32.9% | 65.6% | R+32.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 356Precinct 356 | 690 | 2,084 | 40 | 2,814 | 24.5% | 74.1% | R+49.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 159Precinct 159 | 864 | 1,882 | 32 | 2,778 | 31.1% | 67.7% | R+36.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 462Precinct 462 | 708 | 1,951 | 76 | 2,735 | 25.9% | 71.3% | R+45.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 438Precinct 438 | 1,461 | 1,210 | 30 | 2,701 | 54.1% | 44.8% | D+9.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 363Precinct 363 | 847 | 1,768 | 40 | 2,655 | 31.9% | 66.6% | R+34.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 166Precinct 166 | 827 | 1,790 | 33 | 2,650 | 31.2% | 67.5% | R+36.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 227Precinct 227 | 462 | 2,166 | 15 | 2,643 | 17.5% | 82.0% | R+64.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 428Precinct 428 | 412 | 2,201 | 15 | 2,628 | 15.7% | 83.8% | R+68.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 460Precinct 460 | 632 | 1,948 | 30 | 2,610 | 24.2% | 74.6% | R+50.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 387Precinct 387 | 685 | 1,848 | 32 | 2,565 | 26.7% | 72.0% | R+45.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 439Precinct 439 | 806 | 1,699 | 29 | 2,534 | 31.8% | 67.0% | R+35.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 483Precinct 483 | 916 | 1,582 | 36 | 2,534 | 36.1% | 62.4% | R+26.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 419Precinct 419 | 1,114 | 1,389 | 22 | 2,525 | 44.1% | 55.0% | R+10.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 206Precinct 206 | 1,349 | 1,033 | 41 | 2,423 | 55.7% | 42.6% | D+13.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 167Precinct 167 | 717 | 1,664 | 25 | 2,406 | 29.8% | 69.2% | R+39.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 225Precinct 225 | 459 | 1,911 | 30 | 2,400 | 19.1% | 79.6% | R+60.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 148Precinct 148 | 881 | 1,476 | 18 | 2,375 | 37.1% | 62.1% | R+25.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 142Precinct 142 | 1,207 | 1,133 | 26 | 2,366 | 51.0% | 47.9% | D+3.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 151Precinct 151 | 549 | 1,799 | 13 | 2,361 | 23.3% | 76.2% | R+52.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 364Precinct 364 | 710 | 1,593 | 32 | 2,335 | 30.4% | 68.2% | R+37.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 191Precinct 191 | 740 | 1,452 | 35 | 2,227 | 33.2% | 65.2% | R+32.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 215Precinct 215 | 1,319 | 850 | 25 | 2,194 | 60.1% | 38.7% | D+21.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 218Precinct 218 | 1,072 | 1,024 | 33 | 2,129 | 50.4% | 48.1% | D+2.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 370Precinct 370 | 689 | 1,412 | 27 | 2,128 | 32.4% | 66.4% | R+34.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 224Precinct 224 | 946 | 1,124 | 33 | 2,103 | 45.0% | 53.4% | R+8.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 193Precinct 193 | 743 | 1,325 | 34 | 2,102 | 35.3% | 63.0% | R+27.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 185Precinct 185 | 665 | 1,410 | 26 | 2,101 | 31.7% | 67.1% | R+35.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 214Precinct 214 | 1,376 | 661 | 25 | 2,062 | 66.7% | 32.1% | D+34.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 277Precinct 277 | 307 | 1,737 | 12 | 2,056 | 14.9% | 84.5% | R+69.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 146Precinct 146 | 747 | 1,279 | 16 | 2,042 | 36.6% | 62.6% | R+26.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 223Precinct 223 | 959 | 1,034 | 30 | 2,023 | 47.4% | 51.1% | R+3.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 371Precinct 371 | 729 | 1,164 | 45 | 1,938 | 37.6% | 60.1% | R+22.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 355Precinct 355 | 730 | 1,167 | 29 | 1,926 | 37.9% | 60.6% | R+22.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 165Precinct 165 | 578 | 1,319 | 25 | 1,922 | 30.1% | 68.6% | R+38.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 226Precinct 226 | 546 | 1,335 | 18 | 1,899 | 28.8% | 70.3% | R+41.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 144Precinct 144 | 591 | 1,277 | 23 | 1,891 | 31.3% | 67.5% | R+36.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 495Precinct 495 | 497 | 1,356 | 33 | 1,886 | 26.4% | 71.9% | R+45.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 436Precinct 436 | 1,586 | 272 | 12 | 1,870 | 84.8% | 14.5% | D+70.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 221Precinct 221 | 541 | 1,285 | 15 | 1,841 | 29.4% | 69.8% | R+40.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 386Precinct 386 | 620 | 1,162 | 31 | 1,813 | 34.2% | 64.1% | R+29.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 401Precinct 401 | 538 | 1,131 | 39 | 1,708 | 31.5% | 66.2% | R+34.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 276Precinct 276 | 737 | 926 | 16 | 1,679 | 43.9% | 55.2% | R+11.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 429Precinct 429 | 615 | 1,033 | 19 | 1,667 | 36.9% | 62.0% | R+25.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 431Precinct 431 | 1,108 | 488 | 18 | 1,614 | 68.6% | 30.2% | D+38.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 435Precinct 435 | 757 | 774 | 19 | 1,550 | 48.8% | 49.9% | R+1.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 150Precinct 150 | 531 | 985 | 14 | 1,530 | 34.7% | 64.4% | R+29.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 230Precinct 230 | 877 | 587 | 16 | 1,480 | 59.3% | 39.7% | D+19.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 422Precinct 422 | 426 | 935 | 11 | 1,372 | 31.0% | 68.1% | R+37.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 152Precinct 152 | 397 | 916 | 9 | 1,322 | 30.0% | 69.3% | R+39.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 216Precinct 216 | 766 | 537 | 17 | 1,320 | 58.0% | 40.7% | D+17.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 492Precinct 492 | 328 | 953 | 13 | 1,294 | 25.3% | 73.6% | R+48.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 432Precinct 432 | 586 | 664 | 20 | 1,270 | 46.1% | 52.3% | R+6.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 458Precinct 458 | 155 | 936 | 8 | 1,099 | 14.1% | 85.2% | R+71.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 202Precinct 202 | 624 | 457 | 16 | 1,097 | 56.9% | 41.7% | D+15.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 143Precinct 143 | 544 | 538 | 8 | 1,090 | 49.9% | 49.4% | D+0.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 479Precinct 479 | 163 | 915 | 6 | 1,084 | 15.0% | 84.4% | R+69.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 203Precinct 203 | 153 | 850 | 1 | 1,004 | 15.2% | 84.7% | R+69.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 211Precinct 211 | 565 | 305 | 19 | 889 | 63.6% | 34.3% | D+29.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 384Precinct 384 | 325 | 557 | 7 | 889 | 36.6% | 62.7% | R+26.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 173Precinct 173 | 294 | 566 | 21 | 881 | 33.4% | 64.2% | R+30.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 341Precinct 341 | 360 | 471 | 10 | 841 | 42.8% | 56.0% | R+13.2 |
| Precinct -Precinct 204Precinct 204 | 151 | 673 | 4 | 828 | 18.2% | 81.3% | R+63.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 434Precinct 434 | 549 | 241 | 8 | 798 | 68.8% | 30.2% | D+38.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 197Precinct 197 | 216 | 441 | 7 | 664 | 32.5% | 66.4% | R+33.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 274Precinct 274 | 164 | 487 | 3 | 654 | 25.1% | 74.5% | R+49.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 392Precinct 392 | 199 | 381 | 5 | 585 | 34.0% | 65.1% | R+31.1 |
| Precinct -Precinct 196Precinct 196 | 411 | 148 | 3 | 562 | 73.1% | 26.3% | D+46.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 389Precinct 389 | 267 | 178 | 1 | 446 | 59.9% | 39.9% | D+20.0 |
| Precinct -Precinct 245Precinct 245 | 291 | 110 | 3 | 404 | 72.0% | 27.2% | D+44.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 172Precinct 172 | 92 | 274 | 1 | 367 | 25.1% | 74.7% | R+49.6 |
| Precinct -Precinct 2323Precinct 2323 | 56 | 296 | 2 | 354 | 15.8% | 83.6% | R+67.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 340Precinct 340 | 249 | 71 | 2 | 322 | 77.3% | 22.0% | D+55.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 275Precinct 275 | 96 | 185 | 2 | 283 | 33.9% | 65.4% | R+31.4 |
| Precinct -Precinct 398Precinct 398 | 137 | 139 | 2 | 278 | 49.3% | 50.0% | R+0.7 |
| Precinct -Precinct 482Precinct 482 | 50 | 184 | 2 | 236 | 21.2% | 78.0% | R+56.8 |
| Precinct -Precinct 399Precinct 399 | 83 | 110 | 1 | 194 | 42.8% | 56.7% | R+13.9 |
| Precinct -Precinct 481Precinct 481 | 32 | 119 | 3 | 154 | 20.8% | 77.3% | R+56.5 |
| Precinct -Precinct 4391Precinct 4391 | 7 | 14 | 0 | 21 | 33.3% | 66.7% | R+33.3 |
| Precinct -Precinct 168Precinct 168 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 100.0% | R+100.0 |
Presidential margin, 1904–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1904 | +50.3% |
| 1908 | +43.0% |
| 1912 | +62.2% |
| 1916 | +46.3% |
| 1920 | +24.4% |
| 1924 | +41.4% |
| 1928 | +14.9% |
| 1932 | +67.4% |
| 1936 | +69.4% |
| 1940 | +64.0% |
| 1944 | +67.7% |
| 1948 | +40.6% |
| 1952 | +9.6% |
| 1956 | −5.9% |
| 1960 | +18.5% |
| 1964 | +42.4% |
| 1968 | +18.7% |
| 1972 | −15.6% |
| 1976 | +19.8% |
| 1980 | +2.0% |
| 1984 | −5.4% |
| 1988 | +5.0% |
| 1992 | +8.1% |
| 1996 | +4.0% |
| 2000 | −11.2% |
| 2004 | −16.4% |
| 2008 | −19.5% |
| 2012 | −26.8% |
| 2016 | −24.5% |
| 2020 | −22.6% |
| 2024 | −27.4% |
U.S. Senate
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 208,232 |
| 2018 | 206,534 |
| 2020 | 228,482 |
| 2022 | 235,262 |
| 2024 | 245,695 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+3,422 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +45,472 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $80,049 in average income, against $102,648 for residents who stayed — 22% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+1.1 on average — 26 points more Democratic-leaning than Galveston County, TX itself (R+27.4).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Harris County, TX4,440D+5.5
- Brazoria County, TX833R+19.7
- Fort Bend County, TX289D+1.6
- Montgomery County, TX186R+45.5
- Travis County, TX168D+39.3
- Dallas County, TX150D+22.2
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Harris County, TX3,559
- Brazoria County, TX843
- Montgomery County, TX257
- Fort Bend County, TX244
- Travis County, TX218
- Bexar County, TX129
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 | +941 |
| 2012 | +3,168 |
| 2013 | +3,471 |
| 2014 | +4,543 |
| 2015 | +5,489 |
| 2016 | +5,624 |
| 2017 | +3,859 |
| 2018 | +1,813 |
| 2019 | +2,949 |
| 2021 | +3,424 |
| 2022 | +1,088 |
| 2023 | +2,962 |
| 2024 | +2,719 |
| 2025 | +3,422 |
Galveston County has trended sharply Republican over the past decade despite a diversifying population, delivering a 27-point margin in 2024 while absorbing steady migration from the Houston metro along its rapidly developing northern edge.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 69.4 points in 1936 and a Republican high of 27.4 points in 2024. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 4.8 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 27.4 points.
A population of 358,990, a 54% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $86,105 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Maricopa County and Brazoria 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 →
Galveston County, Texas. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/48167/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.