Every partisan in America lives somewhere, and somewhere has a vote count. Match each respondent in the Cooperative Election Study to the presidential result of their own county, and you can ask a simple question the usual red-and-blue maps never answer: how many Democrats actually live in Republican places, how many Republicans live in Democratic ones — and are they the same kind of place?
Pool the last two presidential cycles and the topline is lopsided. 42.3% of Republicans live in a county their party lost, against 30.7% of Democrats. The deep end is asymmetric too: 19.0% of Republicans live in a county their party lost by twenty two-party points or more, versus 16.0% of Democrats. Democrats are the more spatially insulated party — consistent with what Brown and Enos found in nationwide voter-file records — but tens of millions of partisans on both sides wake up every day as the local political minority.
The interesting part is not how many. It is where. The two stranded populations barely overlap on the map.
The same map, seen from opposite sides
The pair of maps below shows, county by county, what share of each party's local members are stranded — living in a county their party lost in that cycle's presidential vote. Each map covers the 579 counties with at least 50 pooled CES partisan respondents; smaller cells are suppressed and drawn in beige. Because strandedness is decided by the county result, most counties sit at one extreme or the other; the in-between shades are counties that flipped between 2020 and 2024, leaving the same residents stranded in one cycle but not the other.
Behind enemy lines, county by county
Weighted share of each party's local partisans living in a county their party lost · pooled 2020+2024 CES cycles, each respondent scored against their own cycle's result · hover a county for detail
Stranded Democrats
Share of local Democrats in a county the party lost
Stranded Republicans
Share of local Republicans in a county the party lost
Read the Democratic map and your eye goes to the South and the interior: a broad scatter of Sun Belt suburbs, mid-size metros, and small cities where Democrats live in numbers but lose anyway. Read the Republican map and the stranded population snaps to the coasts and the big-metro cores — Los Angeles, the Bay Area, New York, Chicago, Seattle, Denver, Washington. These are not mirror images of one another. They are different geographies of political exile.
A Southern story and a big-city story
Put numbers on the asymmetry. Among all Democrats, 36.4% live in the census South. Among stranded Democrats, it is 47.6% — nearly half. The West runs the other way: it houses 23.9% of all Democrats but just 13.3% of the stranded ones, because a Western Democrat usually lives in a county the party carries. The single biggest concentrations of outvoted Democrats are Florida (9.6% of all stranded Democrats), Texas (8.2%), Pennsylvania (6.3%), and Ohio (5.3%) — states where Democrats are numerous but blue counties are few.
Stranded Republicans are the inverted image. California alone houses 12.6% of them — more than any other state — and California, New York, and Illinois together hold 24.0%. Even Texas (9.7%) and Florida (8.1%) contribute their own blue-metro Republicans, conservatives living in Houston, Dallas, Austin, Miami, and Orlando counties that their party lost. The stranded Republican is, overwhelmingly, a city or inner-suburb dweller in a state or metro the party has written off.
Where each party's stranded actually live
Top 10 states by share of each party's stranded population, pooled 2020+2024 cycles · the notch marks that state's share of all of the party's partisans · hover for detail
Share of all stranded Democrats
Share of all stranded Republicans
2024 flipped who lives behind enemy lines
For four straight presidential cycles, Republicans were clearly the more stranded party. In the 2008 cycle, 50.5% of Republicans lived in a county Obama carried, against 31.9% of Democrats in McCain counties. The gap stayed Republican-heavy through 2012 (44.6% vs 34.5%) and 2016 (39.8% vs 35.8%), then blew out in 2020: 44.6% of Republicans stranded versus just 28.4% of Democrats — a 16.2-point gap, the deepest Democratic insulation in the series. The median Democrat that cycle lived in a county Biden carried by about 15.2 points.
Then 2024. For the first time since the 2004 (Bush) cycle, the gap inverted: 40.3% of Democrats now live in a county Trump won, versus 33.5% of Republicans in Harris counties. The result is robust to counting partisan leaners (41.3% vs 35.1%), and the median Democrat's county cushion thinned from D+15.2 to D+9.1.
The stranded gap, 2004–2024 cycles
Weighted share of each party living in a county their party lost, by presidential cycle · hover for values
Nobody had to move for this to happen. Between 2020 and 2024, 86 counties flipped from Democratic to Republican and exactly zero flipped the other way. Decompose 2024's stranded Democrats against the 2020 map: 76.1% of them live in counties that were already red in 2020 — the long-standing Southern and small-metro stranded population — but 23.9% were stranded by a county that flipped under their feet. That second group is 9.6% of all Democrats: roughly one in ten woke up newly outvoted at home without changing their address, in places like Miami-Dade and a belt of Sun Belt and border counties. The same tide un-stranded 9.0% of Republicans.
This is the load-bearing caveat of the whole exercise: strandedness is tide-sensitive. A red-shifting map raises Democratic strandedness mechanically, with zero migration. Three-quarters of the 2024 stranded-Democrat population is structural; one quarter is the 2024 tide itself. Whether the inversion persists depends on whether those 86 flips do.
More landslide counties than ever — barely more landslide people
Strandedness is the flip side of the Big Sort, Bill Bishop's famous observation that Americans increasingly live in landslide counties. The full county record bears him out, with a twist. In 1976, 1,150 of 3,104 counties (37.0%) were decided by twenty-plus two-party points, and they held 26.4% of the two-party vote. By 2020, landslide counties held 58.1% of the vote; in 2024 the count of landslide counties hit an all-time record — 2,493 of 3,113, or 80.1% — while the share of votes cast in them slipped slightly, to 57.2%. Four-fifths of counties are now landslides; they contain a bit more than half the voters.
The person-level CES series tells the same story: the share of American adults living in a landslide county climbed from 46.4% in the 2008 cycle to 58.0% in 2020, and eased only to 57.4% in 2024 — a dip of under one point on the vote-weighted series, not a reversal. The sorting plateaued at a high altitude. What changed in 2024 is the partisan composition: blue-metro margins compressed while rural red margins deepened, which is exactly the mechanism that stranded those new Democrats.
Landslide counties vs landslide voters, 1972–2024
Counties with a 20+ two-party-point margin: share of all counties vs share of all two-party votes cast in them · hover for values
What this shows — and what it doesn't
This is a description of exposure, not of experience or behavior. A county is a blunt container: a Democrat in a red county may live on a blue block, and the reverse. The pooled 2020+2024 window deliberately mixes a Democratic-win and a Republican-win cycle — each respondent is scored against their own cycle's county result, which is why flip counties show intermediate shades on the maps. The county maps under-represent rural America because the N≥50 rule keeps only well-sampled counties: they cover 85.7% of weighted Democrats but 71.4% of weighted Republicans, so the Republican stranded share you can see on the map is more complete than the rural-red insulation you can't. State shares are shares of each party's weighted stranded population, not state population shares. And nothing here is causal: we cannot say whether being stranded changes anyone's politics, only where the stranded are. Finally, the 2024 cycle rests on a single survey wave where earlier cycles pool four, so its estimates are noisier — though the inversion survives the leaner robustness check.