If you spent the weeks leading up to the last election glued to a "ballot tracker," you weren't alone. Millions of us were refreshing pages from the University of Florida Election Lab like they were sports scores. We saw the "red wave" of early in-person voting and the "blue wall" of mail-in ballots. But honestly, trying to call a race based on early voting numbers by state is kinda like trying to predict the end of a movie by watching the first ten minutes of the trailers. You get the vibe, sure, but you usually miss the plot twist.
The 2024 election cycle basically rewrote the rulebook on how Americans vote. We moved from the "emergency" pandemic voting of 2020 to a new, permanent reality where Election Day is more like the finish line of a month-long marathon. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 60% of voters cast their ballots before the actual Tuesday in November.
The Massive Shift in Early Voting Numbers by State
Let's look at the raw scale of this thing. In 2024, over 85 million Americans voted early. That is a staggering number. To put it in perspective, the total turnout in the 2012 election was about 129 million. We’re now seeing cycles where more than half the electorate is "in the bank" before the polls even open on Tuesday morning.
But the data isn't distributed evenly. The South has become the king of early in-person voting. In states like Georgia and North Carolina, more than 50% of voters showed up to physical locations before Election Day. Meanwhile, the West remains the stronghold of the "permanent mail-in" culture. California alone saw over 8 million early votes, with the vast majority coming through the mail.
It’s easy to look at a state like Florida and think the race is over early. In 2024, Republicans built a massive 12-point registration lead in the early vote. When you see a gap that big, it’s tempting to close the book. But as Dr. Michael McDonald from the UF Election Lab often points out, these numbers tell us who is voting, not how they are voting.
🔗 Read more: The Brutal Reality of the Russian Mail Order Bride Locked in Basement Headlines
Why Partisan Breakdown is a Trap
Here is where it gets tricky. In most states, we can see if a voter is a registered Democrat, Republican, or Independent. But we don't see the actual bubble they filled in.
- Cannibalization: This is the big one. If a Republican who always votes on Tuesday decides to vote early on a Saturday instead, the "early voting numbers by state" go up for the GOP, but the total vote count for the candidate doesn't change. They just moved their vote from one column to another.
- The Independent X-Factor: About 26% of early voters in 2024 were unaffiliated or "minor party" voters. These are the people who actually decide the election, and we have zero data on their preferences until the results are tallied.
- The Gender Gap: In 2024, women outpaced men in early voting by a significant margin—about 54% to 44% in reporting states like Michigan and Virginia.
What Really Happened in the Battlegrounds
The "Blue Wall" states—Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—usually offer the most drama. In Pennsylvania, for example, the early vote is heavily skewed toward mail-in ballots. Because of state laws that (at the time) prevented officials from processing these ballots early, we saw what experts call a "red mirage."
The in-person votes (often more Republican) were counted first, making it look like a landslide. Then, the mail-in "blue shift" happened as the early voting numbers by state were finally fully tabulated.
In Georgia, it was the opposite. The state has embraced early in-person voting so much that it's basically the default. They saw record-breaking turnout, with over 4 million people voting before Election Day. But here’s the kicker: even with those huge numbers, the final margin in the state was incredibly slim. It shows that high early turnout doesn't always mean a blowout; sometimes it just means everyone is really, really motivated.
💡 You might also like: The Battle of the Chesapeake: Why Washington Should Have Lost
The Myth of the "Low Propensity" Voter
Political campaigns use early voting numbers by state to figure out who hasn't voted yet. If they see their "high-propensity" voters (the folks who vote in every dog-catcher election) have already turned in their ballots, they can spend their remaining money chasing "low-propensity" voters.
In 2024, we saw a weird shift. Republicans, who previously were skeptical of mail-in voting, leaned into it. This closed the "early vote gap" that Democrats had enjoyed for years. When both sides are equally good at getting their people to the polls early, the data becomes "noisy." It stops being a predictive tool and starts being a reflection of a highly polarized, highly organized country.
Breaking Down the Demographics (It’s not just old people)
Usually, the early vote is the domain of the 65+ crowd. They have the time, and they have the habit. In 2024, that stayed mostly true—voters over 65 made up about 34% of the early vote. However, the 41-65 age bracket actually took the lead in some states, making up nearly 40% of the early electorate.
- Asian Americans: Voted by mail at the highest rate (roughly 46%).
- Black Voters: Preferred early in-person voting more than any other group.
- Young Voters (18-25): Still the laggards, making up only about 8-9% of the early vote. They tend to be the "procrastinators" who surge on Election Day or the final weekend of early voting.
Stop Reading the Tea Leaves
If you're looking at early voting numbers by state to find out who won, you're going to give yourself an ulcer. The data is most useful for understanding logistics, not destiny. It tells us if the post office is handling the volume. It tells us if polling places have long lines. It tells us which campaigns have the best "get out the vote" (GOTV) operations.
📖 Related: Texas Flash Floods: What Really Happens When a Summer Camp Underwater Becomes the Story
But it doesn't tell us about the "persuadables." It doesn't tell us about the person who decided their vote while standing in line.
Actionable Insights for the Next Cycle
Since early voting is clearly here to stay, you should change how you consume election news.
- Check the "Requested" vs. "Returned" Rate: This is more important than the raw number. If a party requests 2 million ballots but only returns 1 million, that's a massive red flag for their ground game.
- Watch the Rural vs. Urban Split: If rural early voting numbers by state are spiking, it usually favors conservatives. If urban centers like Philly, Atlanta, or Detroit are seeing massive early lines, the momentum is likely with the liberals.
- Ignore the First Week: The first few days are always just the super-partisans. The "real" trends don't start to emerge until about 10 days before the election.
- Look at "New" Voters: One of the most interesting stats to watch is the percentage of early voters who didn't vote in the previous two elections. If that number is high, expect an upset.
The reality of early voting is that it has made our elections more accessible, but it has made our predictions more fragile. We have more data than ever, yet we seem to understand the final outcome less. Instead of treating these numbers as a crystal ball, treat them as a weather report: they tell you the conditions on the ground, but they can't stop the storm from changing direction at the last minute.
To get the most accurate picture, stop looking at national averages. Focus on the specific laws of each state—like whether they allow "ballot curing" (fixing mistakes on a mail-in ballot) or how long they allow ballots to arrive after Tuesday. Those technical details matter way more than a flashy bar chart on cable news.
Next Steps for Informed Voters:
Keep an eye on the Elections Administration and Voting Survey (EAVS) reports. They provide the most "sober" look at how these systems actually functioned without the campaign spin. Also, bookmark the MIT Election Data and Science Lab; they do a great job of stripping away the politics to show how the mechanics of early voting actually influence who shows up.