You’ve seen the image a thousand times. A vast sea of red stretching across the American heartland, punctuated by small, intense dots of deep blue along the coasts and in the cities. It’s the us election results map, and honestly, it’s probably the most misleading graphic in modern American life.
It looks like a landslide. Every time.
If you just glance at the geographic map, you’d think one side completely dominated the other. But land doesn't vote. People do. This is the fundamental tension that makes election night so stressful and the days following it so full of "how did this happen?" questions.
The Optical Illusion of the US Election Results Map
The biggest problem with the standard choropleth map—that’s the technical term for the maps where states are colored solid red or blue—is that it equates acreage with influence.
Take a state like Wyoming. It’s huge. On a map, it takes up a lot of visual real estate. In the 2024 election, it went for Donald Trump by a massive margin of about 46 points. But Wyoming only has three electoral votes. Now, look at a tiny speck like Washington, D.C. It’s barely a pixel on some maps, yet it also has three electoral votes and went for Kamala Harris by a staggering 84 points.
💡 You might also like: Pentagon reporters access restrictions: Why the E-Ring is getting harder to cover
On your screen, the red of Wyoming looks vastly more "important" than the blue dot of D.C., even though their impact on the Electoral College is identical.
This is why data nerds and cartographers like Kenneth Field or the folks at ArcGIS often prefer "cartograms." These are those funky-looking maps where states are resized based on their population or their number of electoral votes. When you look at one of those, the "sea of red" suddenly shrinks, and the urban centers bulge out. It looks less like a map of a country and more like a collection of balloons, but it’s a much more honest representation of where the power actually sits.
Why the Colors Are Red and Blue (It’s Not What You Think)
Kinda weirdly, the red-for-Republican and blue-for-Democrat thing is actually pretty new. It hasn't always been this way.
Before the 2000 election (the infamous Bush vs. Gore showdown), TV networks used to switch it up all the time. Sometimes Democrats were red, sometimes Republicans were. In many other countries, red is the color of the "left" or labor parties, while blue is for conservatives.
👉 See also: Why Tornado Warnings Issued Amid Heavy Windstorm Near Portland Changed Everything This Week
It was basically Tim Russert on NBC and the graphics teams at the major networks in 2000 who solidified the current scheme. They just stuck with it because the 2000 recount went on so long that the "Red State / Blue State" terminology became baked into our brains. Now, we can't imagine it any other way.
The "Purple" Reality Hiding in Plain Sight
Another thing that the us election results map gets wrong is the idea of "solid" states.
When a map shows a state as solid red, it implies every single person there voted Republican. That’s never true. Not even close. Even in the "reddest" states like West Virginia or Oklahoma, hundreds of thousands of people voted for the Democrat. Similarly, millions of Republicans live in "deep blue" California—more than in many "red" states combined.
The Rise of the Margin Map
To fix this, some outlets now use "value-by-alpha" maps or shaded maps. Instead of a hard red or blue, they use shades of purple.
- Deep Red/Blue: A massive blowout (20+ point margin).
- Light Red/Blue: A narrow victory (under 5 points).
- Lavender/Greyish: A true toss-up.
When you look at the 2024 results through this lens, the country doesn't look like two warring factions. It looks like a gradient. The "urban-rural divide" is real, sure, but it's not a brick wall. It’s more like a slow fade.
What Actually Shifted in 2024?
If you look at the county-level shifts, the 2024 us election results map tells a story of movement, not just stagnation.
According to data analyzed by the Pew Research Center, the biggest story wasn't just "red vs. blue," but how certain groups moved.
- The Hispanic Shift: Trump made massive gains with Hispanic voters, particularly men. This turned counties in South Texas and parts of Florida a much deeper shade of red than we've seen in decades.
- The Urban Erosion: While big cities like Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee stayed blue, the margins narrowed. Harris still won them, but by less than Biden did in 2020.
- The Education Gap: The "diploma divide" is now the clearest predictor of how a county will look on the map. Counties with high percentages of college graduates are turning bluer, while those with more blue-collar workers are trending red.
How to Read These Maps Without Getting Fooled
Next time an election rolls around, or when you're looking at historical data, don't just stare at the big blocks of color.
First, look for the lead margin. A state that is 50.1% to 49.9% shouldn't look the same as a state that is 70% to 30%.
Second, check the bubbles. Many sites now use circles sized by the number of votes cast. This shows you that a tiny blue circle in the middle of a giant red county might actually represent more human beings than the entire surrounding area.
Third, remember the Electoral College vs. The Popular Vote. The map represents the path to 270 electoral votes. It’s a game of geography, not just a raw count of heads. This is why "swing states" like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin get all the attention. They are the "purple" places that decide which color the whole map turns.
Actionable Insights for the Informed Voter
If you want to actually understand the political landscape rather than just getting mad at a colorful graphic, here’s what you should do:
- Stop using the "National" view: Zoom in. Look at your own county. Then look at the neighboring one. The real story is always local.
- Use "Cartogram" filters: Sites like Bloomberg or The New York Times usually offer a toggle to switch from a geographic map to a "tiles" or "bubbles" map. Use it. It’s way more accurate for representing power.
- Ignore "Election Night" maps for 48 hours: Early returns are often skewed by which precincts report first (usually rural ones report faster). The map often starts very red and "shifts" blue as urban mail-in ballots are counted. This isn't fraud; it's just logistics.
- Look at the "Swing" data: Don't just look at who won. Look at the change from the last election. Is the county becoming more or less partisan? That's where the future of the country is actually being written.
The us election results map is a tool, but like any tool, it can be used to build a false narrative if you don't know how to handle it. Land doesn't vote, people do—and people are a lot more complicated than a single shade of red or blue.