Month: December 2022

By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – December 31, 2022

With December voter registration numbers, voters registered as Non-Partisan or in minor parties closed out 2022 not only expanding their lead with an average growth of almost two percent over the year; Non-Partisan voter share growth averaged over two and one-half percent, but elected a new governor, lieutenant governor, and controller.  

In addition to the three races mentioned above, voters not affiliated with either the Democratic or Republican Party impacted the margin of victory of many other races. NOTE: A breakout is included with this report.

State-Wide

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	632	0.10%	32.39%	-0.12%	-1.54%
R	404	0.07%	29.67%	-0.12%	-0.21%
NP	7,514	1.32%	30.37%	0.25%	2.69%
IAP	672	0.82%	4.35%	0.01%	-0.14%
LIB	50	0.30%	0.88%	0.00%	-0.07%
Other	-174	-0.39%	2.34%	-0.02%	-0.73%
Total not D or R			37.94%	0.24%	1.75%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Clark County

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	563	0.12%	35.11%	-0.16%	-1.71%
R	365	0.10%	25.77%	-0.12%	-0.22%
NP	6,314	1.49%	31.56%	0.29%	2.93%
IAP	516	0.91%	4.20%	0.01%	-0.13%
LIB	54	0.51%	0.78%	0.00%	-0.06%
Other	-138	-0.39%	2.57%	-0.02%	-0.81%
Total not D or R			39.12%	0.28%	1.93%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Washoe County

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	187	0.19%	31.66%	-0.03%	-0.90%
R	203	0.20%	33.02%	-0.03%	0.19%
NP	421	0.49%	27.48%	0.05%	1.49%
IAP	123	0.87%	4.55%	0.03%	-0.07%
LIB	5	0.14%	1.17%	0.00%	-0.09%
Other	-13	-0.20%	2.11%	-0.01%	-0.63%
Total not D or R			35.32%	0.07	0.71%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Rural Counties (See rural county table below district tables)

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	-118	-0.28%	17.65%	-0.09%	-1.48%
R	-164	-0.15%	47.73%	-0.17%	-0.57%
NP	779	1.23%	27.29%	0.27%	2.77%
IAP	33	0.29%	4.91%	0.00%	-0.30%
LIB	-9	-0.35%	1.09%	-0.01%	-0.04%
Other	-23	-0.73%	1.32%	-0.01%	-0.39%
Total not D or R			34.62%	0.25%	2.05%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

18 – 34 Year Old

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	34	0.02%	30.88%	-0.18%	-2.31%
R	41	0.04%	17.73%	-0.10%	-0.80%
NP	3,181	1.40%	42.74%	0.33%	4.55%
IAP	122	0.53%	4.30%	0.00%	-0.18%
LIB	4	0.05%	1.35%	-0.01%	-0.15%
Other	-122	-0.75%	3.00%	-0.04%	-1.11%
Total not D or R			51.39%	0.28%	3.11%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

55+

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %	2021 – 2022 Voter Share Change
D	183	0.07%	34.46%	-0.09%	-1.10%
R	260	0.09%	39.10%	-0.10%	0.29%
NP	1,885	1.22%	20.39%	0.18%	1.43%
IAP	280	0.88%	4.19%	0.02%	-0.15%
LIB	13	0.42%	0.40%	0.00%	-0.03%
Other	-10	-0.09%	1.46%	-0.01%	-3.89%
Total not D or R			26.44%	0.19%	0.81%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

By district voter share changes.

Congressional Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	4	0	0
Republican	4	0	0
NP	0	4	0
IAP	0	4	0
LIB	0	0	4
Other	3	1	0

In all Congressional districts (100 percent of the districts) the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In three (75%) of the districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

State Senate Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	20	1	0
Republican	20	1	0
NP	1	20	0
IAP	1	18	2
LIB	5	3	13
Other	20	0	1

In all 21 districts (100%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In 13 (61.90%) of the 21 districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

State Assembly Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	40	2	0
Republican	41	1	0
NP	2	40	0
IAP	2	30	10
LIB	12	8	22
Other	35	4	3

In all 42 districts (100%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In 25 (59.53%) of the 42 districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

Rural Counties

Party	# Counties Lose Voter Share	# Counties Gain Voter Share	# Counties No Change
Democratic	11	4	0
Republican	13	2	0
NP	2	13	0
IAP	7	8	0
LIB	6	6	3
Other	10	1	4

As we head into the legislative session, it is important to note that in sixty percent of legislative districts, voters registered as neither Democratic nor Republican is the largest voting bloc. Are legislators aware of this and how will that awareness, or lack thereof, affect the legislative process?

Impact of Non-Major Party Voters on 2022 General Election

Column Definition:

Percent – Percent of vote received

Party – Political Party of candidate

Reg % Party voter share

Diff Reg – Difference in voter share of major party candidates

Diff Vote to Reg – Difference of vote received to party voter share

Margin of Win – Percent of vote received, winner to second place candidate

Diff Margin of Win to Diff Ref – Comparison of margin of win to difference in voter share

Impact of non-major party voters can be deducted by comparing difference in voter share to margin of win. Example, Republican Party voter share is almost three percent lower than Democratic Party share yet Joe Lombardo won the race for governor by one and one-half percent.

Governor
	Percent	Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
BRIDGES, ED	0.97%	IAP	4.31%		-3.34%
DAVIS, BRANDON	1.46%	LP	0.88%		0.58%
LOMBARDO, JOE	48.81%	R	29.84%	-2.82%	18.97%	1.51%	4.33%
SISOLAK, STEVE	47.30%	D	32.66%		14.64%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	1.46%
Lieutenant Governor
ANTHONY, STAVROS	49.41%	R	29.84%	-2.82%	19.57%	3.66%	6.48%
CANO BURKHEAD, ELIZABETH “LISA”	45.75%	D	32.66%		13.09%
DELAP, JOHN “TREY”	0.78%	NP	29.87%		-29.09%
HOGE, WILLIAM	0.83%	IAP	4.31%		-3.48%
TACHIQUIN, JAVI “TRUJILLO”	1.13%	LP	0.88%		0.25%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	2.09%
State Controller
MATTHEWS, ANDY	50.06%	R	29.84%	-2.82%	20.22%	4.13%	6.95%
PROFETA, JED W.	1.52%	LP	0.88%		0.64%
SPIEGEL, ELLEN	45.93%	D	32.66%		13.27%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	2.48%
United States Senator
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
	PERCENT
CORTEZ MASTO, CATHERINE	48.81%	D	32.66%	2.82%	16.15%	0.77%	-2.05%
LAXALT, ADAM PAUL	48.04%	R	29.84%		18.20%
LINDEMANN, BARRY	0.79%	NP	29.87%		-29.08%
RUBINSON, BARRY	0.51%	IAP	4.31%		-3.80%
SCOTT, NEIL	0.63%	LP	0.88%		-0.25%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	1.22%
U.S. Representative in Congress, District 1
CAVANAUGH, KEN	2.47%	LP	0.78%		1.69%
ROBERTSON, MARK	45.96%	R	25.67%		20.29%
TITUS, DINA	51.57%	D	35.60%	9.93%	15.97%	5.61%	-4.32%
U.S. Representative in Congress, District 2
AMODEI, MARK E.	59.73%	R	39.02%	12.58%	20.71%	21.93%	9.35%
BABER, DARRYL	1.12%	LP	1.15%		-0.03%
BEST, RUSSELL	1.35%	IAP	4.63%		-3.28%
KRAUSE, ELIZABETH MERCEDES	37.80%	D	26.44%		11.36%
U.S. Representative in Congress, District 3
BECKER, APRIL	48.02%	R	27.51%		20.51%
LEE, SUSIE	51.98%	D	33.37%	5.86%	18.61%	3.96%	-1.90%
U.S. Representative in Congress, District 4
HORSFORD, STEVEN A.	52.42%	D	35.88%	9.62%	16.54%	4.84%	-4.78%
PETERS, SAM	47.58%	R	26.26%		21.32%
State Races
Secretary of State
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
AGUILAR, FRANCISCO “CISCO”	48.95%
CRANE, ROSS	0.87%	LP	0.88%		-0.01%
HANSEN, JANINE	1.72%	IAP	4.31%		-2.59%
MARCHANT, JIM	46.67%	R	29.84%		16.83%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	1.79%
State Treasurer
CONINE, ZACH	47.70%	D	32.66%	2.82%	15.04%	1.70%	-1.12%
ELLIOTT, BRYAN	1.59%	LP	0.88%		0.71%
FIORE, MICHELE	46.00%	R	29.84%		16.16%
HENDRICKSON, MARGARET	1.94%	IAP	4.31%		-2.37%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	2.77%
Attorney General
CHATTAH, SIGAL	44.36%	R	29.84%		14.52%
FORD, AARON D.	52.25%	D	32.66%	2.82%	19.59%	7.89%	5.07%
NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES	3.39%
State Senate, District 2
FLORES, EDGAR	69.93%	D	44.02%	31.64%	25.91%	39.86%	8.22%
HENDERSON, LEO	30.07%	R	12.38%		17.69%
State Senate, District 8
LOOP, MARILYN DONDERO	50.72%	D	32.72%	2.94%	18.00%	1.44%	-1.50%
PAULOS, JOEY	49.28%	R	29.78%		19.50%
State Senate, District 9
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
BROWN, TINA	46.55%	R
SCHEIBLE, MELANIE	53.45%	D	34.71%	9.95%	18.74%	6.90%	-3.05%
State Senate, District 10
CUNNINGHAM, CHRIS	3.64%	LP	0.87%		2.77%
DONATE, FABIAN	55.54%	D	36.99%	16.84%	18.55%	14.72%	-2.12%
GRAVIET, PHILIP	40.82%	R	20.15%		20.67%
State Senate, District 12
ARRINGTON, CHERLYN	47.53%	R	27.59%		19.94%
PAZINA, JULIE ANN	52.47%	D	33.33%	5.74%	19.14%	4.94%	-0.80%
State Senate, District 13
BUEHLER, MATTHEW R.	38.43%	R	23.25%		15.18%
DALY, RICHARD “SKIP”	61.57%	D	36.79%	13.54%	24.78%	23.14%	9.60%
State Senate, District 14
HANSEN, IRA	100.00%	R	43.09%		56.91%
State Senate, District 16
KRASNER, LISA	60.35%	R	40.52%	13.73%	19.83%	20.70%	6.97%
SIMS, AARON	39.65%	D	26.79%		12.86%
State Senate, District 17
TITUS, ROBIN L.	100.00%	R	49.02%		50.98%
State Senate, District 20
FOUTZ, BRENT	35.59%	D	24.79%		10.80%
MILLS, BRANDON	2.72%	LP	0.71%		2.01%
STONE, JEFF	61.69%	R	41.28%	16.49%	20.41%	26.10%	9.61%
State Senate, District 21
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
LARSEN, APRIL	44.21%	R
OHRENSCHALL, JAMES	55.79%	D	40.30%	19.62%	15.49%	11.58%	-8.04%
State Assembly, District 1
BRINKLEY, GARLAND LEE	42.60%	R	25.86%		16.74%
MCATEE-MACRAE, PATRICK “MAC”	2.58%	NP	28.40%		-25.82%
MONROE-MORENO, DANIELE	54.82%	D	38.44%	12.58%	16.38%	12.22%	-0.36%
State Assembly, District 2
BEDNARZ, JASON	1.38%	LP	0.77%		0.61%
CHRISTENSON, NICK	44.28%	D	30.99%		13.29%
KASAMA, HEIDI	54.34%	R	32.72%	1.73%	21.62%	10.06%	8.33%
State Assembly, District 3
LEMACK, JOSHUA	44.67%	R	23.94%		20.73%
TORRES, SELENA ELIZABETH	55.33%	D	37.79%	13.85%	17.54%	10.66%	-3.19%
State Assembly, District 4
BURNS, DARBY LEE	37.38%	LP	0.88%		36.50%
MCARTHUR, RICHARD	62.62%	R	32.55%	31.67%	30.07%	25.24%	-6.43%
State Assembly, District 5
MILLER, BRITTNEY	52.88%	D	34.63%	8.11%	18.25%	7.39%	-0.72%
MORGAN, RONALD	1.64%	LP	0.76%		0.88%
QUINN, KELLY	45.49%	R	26.53%		18.96%
State Assembly, District 6
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
RIOS, KATHRYN “KAT”	18.57%	R
SUMMERS-ARMSTRONG, SHONDRA	81.43%	D	51.40%	42.42%	30.03%	62.86%	20.44%
State Assembly, District 7
MILLER, CAMERON HOMER “C.H.”	63.45%	D	44.38%	26.68%	19.07%	26.90%	0.22%
PALMER, ANTHONY “TONY”	36.55%	R	17.70%		18.85%
State Assembly, District 8
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
LOGAN, JENANN	44.07%	R
NGUYEN, DUY	55.93%	D	33.93%	10.54%	22.00%	11.86%	1.32%
State Assembly, District 9
FLEMING, RYAN PATRICK	46.79%	R	26.34%		20.45%
YEAGER, STEVE	53.21%	D	32.95%	6.61%	20.26%	6.42%	-0.19%
State Assembly, District 10
HERNANDEZ, SANDIE “GISELA”	41.81%	R	21.61%		20.20%
NGUYEN, ROCHELLE	58.19%	D	38.98%	17.37%	19.21%	16.38%	-0.99%
State Assembly, District 11
DURAN, BEATRICE “BEA”	73.35%	D	44.54%	33.19%	28.81%	46.70%	13.51%
KRATTIGER, ERIC	26.65%	R	11.35%		15.30%
State Assembly, District 12
CARTER, II, MAX E.	50.94%	D	38.01%	12.98%	12.93%	1.88%	-11.10%
LARSEN, FLEMMING	49.06%	R	25.03%		24.03%
State Assembly, District 13
	Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
HIBBETTS, BRIAN		R					7.54%
RUCKER, WILL	44.45%	D	30.42%		14.03%
State Assembly, District 14
MOSCA, ERICA	66.00%	D	43.05%	27.58%	22.95%	32.00%	4.42%
STAMPER, SHAWN	34.00%	R	15.47%		18.53%
State Assembly, District 15
BANG, STEVEN D.	37.47%	R	16.41%		21.06%
WATTS, HOWARD	62.53%	D	38.21%	21.80%	24.32%	25.06%	3.26%
State Assembly, District 16
GONZALEZ, CECELIA	53.86%	D	35.92%	12.49%	17.94%	7.72%	-4.77%
HOLDER, JESSE “JAKE”	46.14%	R	23.43%		22.71%
State Assembly, District 17
	Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
PAWLEY, III, EUGENE MICHAEL		R
THOMAS, CLARA “CLAIRE”	65.52%	D	41.67%	23.93%	23.85%	31.04%	7.11%
State Assembly, District 18
CONSIDINE, VENICIA	60.37%	D	39.51%	19.89%	20.86%	20.74%	0.85%
DECORTE, CHRISTINE	39.63%	R	19.62%		20.01%
State Assembly, District 19
YUREK, THADDEUS “TOBY”	100.00%	R	42.78%		57.22%
State Assembly, District 20
	Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
LAROW, JOSIAH L.		LP
ORENTLICHER, DAVID	59.44%	D	39.92%	20.44%	19.52%	21.71%	1.27%
VAUGHAN, STAN	37.73%	R	19.48%		18.25%
State Assembly, District 21
MARZOLA, ELAINE	52.41%	D	33.39%	4.69%	19.02%	4.82%	0.13%
PETRICK, JON S.	47.59%	R	28.70%		18.89%
State Assembly, District 22
HARDY, MELISSA	58.54%	R	34.21%	4.99%	24.33%	17.08%	12.09%
RAMOS, RICK	41.46%	D	29.22%		12.24%
State Assembly, District 23
BRICKFIELD, ELIZABETH	39.60%	D	26.64%		12.96%
GALLANT, DANIELLE	58.87%	R	39.92%	13.28%	18.95%	19.27%	5.99%
MANLEY, MERCY	1.53%	LP	0.72%		0.81%
State Assembly, District 24
KING, DORZELL	34.09%	R	20.84%		13.25%
PETERS, SARAH	65.91%	D	37.88%	17.03%	28.03%	31.82%	14.79%
State Assembly, District 25
KUMAR, SAM	46.10%	R	32.74%		13.36%
LA RUE HATCH, SELENA	53.90%	D	35.17%	2.43%	18.73%	7.80%	5.37%
State Assembly, District 26
DELONG, RICH	71.71%	R	40.02%	12.47%	31.69%	43.42%	30.95%
MITCHELL, REED	28.29%	D	27.55%		0.74%
State Assembly, District 27
	Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
ORTIZ, CARMEN L.		R
TAYLOR, ANGELA	58.21%	D	35.92%	10.44%	22.29%	16.42%	5.98%
State Assembly, District 28
BROWN, CLINT	32.58%	R	13.39%		19.19%
D’SILVA, REUBEN	67.42%	D	43.51%	30.12%	23.91%	34.84%	4.72%
State Assembly, District 29
COHEN, LESLEY ELIZABETH	53.14%	D	33.72%	6.63%	19.42%	6.28%	-0.35%
KNIGHTLY, RHONDA	46.86%	R	27.09%		19.77%
State Assembly, District 30
ANDERSON, NATHA C.	55.21%	D	35.71%	10.07%	19.50%	13.77%	3.70%
MCGEEIN, GARRETT	3.36%	LP	1.14%		2.22%
RODRIGUEZ-ELKINS, RICCI	41.44%	R	25.64%		15.80%
State Assembly, District 31
DICKMAN, JILL	100.00%	R	40.27%		59.73%
State Assembly, District 32
HANSEN, ALEXIS M.	100.00%	R	46.23%		53.77%
State Assembly, District 33
GARRARD, JOHN “DOC”	19.13%	D	13.04%		6.09%
GURR, BERT	80.87%	R	52.52%	39.48%	28.35%	61.74%	22.26%
State Assembly, District 34
BILBRAY-AXELROD, SHANNON	56.12%	D	37.56%	13.38%	18.56%	12.24%	-1.14%
BUTLER, STACY	43.88%	R	24.17%		19.71%
State Assembly, District 35
		Party	Reg %	Diff Reg	Diff Vote to Reg	Margin of win	Diff margin of win -Diff reg
GORELOW, MICHELLE	48.93%	D
JONES, TIFFANY	47.41%	R	28.03%		19.38%
ROBINSON, MINDY	3.66%	LP	0.84%		2.82%
			\
State Assembly, District 36
HAFEN, II, GREGORY T.	100.00%	R	40.29%		59.71%
State Assembly, District 37
BACKUS, SHEA	50.49%	D	34.08%	2.96%	16.41%	2.57%	-0.39%
DEAVILLE, JACOB	47.92%	R	31.11%		16.81%
TEDOFF, MARC	1.60%	LP	0.82%		0.78%
State Assembly, District 38
KOENIG, GREGORY S.	100.00%	R	47.24%		52.76%
State Assembly, District 39
GRAY, KEN	70.17%	R	50.52%	31.54%	19.65%	40.34%	8.80%
NOBLE, JANICE E.	29.83%	D	18.98%		10.85%
State Assembly, District 40
MCDANIEL, SHANNON C.	37.96%	D	25.96%		12.00%
O’NEILL, PHILIP “PK”	58.81%	R	41.06%	15.11%	17.75%	20.85%	5.74%
TOLL, SAM	3.23%	LP	1.22%		2.01%
State Assembly, District 41
BODINE, PAUL	46.07%	R	26.47%		19.60%
JAUREGUI, SANDRA	51.77%	D	33.28%	6.81%	18.49%	5.70%	-1.11%
MCNAMARA, SEAN	2.16%	LP	0.87%		1.29%
State Assembly, District 42
BROWN-MAY, TRACY	56.65%	D	36.56%	13.46%	20.09%	13.30%	-0.16%
FACEY, EDWARD “EDDIE”	43.35%	R	23.10%		20.25%

By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – December 5, 2022

The general election last month brought Nevada a split government; three of the six Constitutional offices going to both the Democratic (treasurer, attorney general, secretary of state) and Republican Party (governor, lieutenant governor, comptroller) and the Democratic Party maintaining a super-majority in the assembly and a majority in the senate. Besides splitting their tickets, voters also continued to prefer to register to vote as members of neither major party.

Statewide, Non-Partisan voter share surpassed 30 percent increasing its lead over the GOP and just two (2) percent behind Democratic voter share. Among younger voters, Non-Partisan registration out-paces Democratic registration by 11 percent and Republican registration by 25 percent. In the rural counties, Non-Partisan registration is 10 percent higher than Democratic and is just four (4) percent behind Democratic share in both Clark and Washoe County. Voters not registered as either Democratic or Republican increased their lead as the largest bloc statewide, in Clark and Washoe County, and among voters 18 to 34 years of age.

The combined Non-Partisan and minor party voter share continued its dominance to where it is now the top voter share in over 50 percent of the state legislative districts (11 of 21 state senate; 52.38% and 24 of 42 state assembly; 57.14%)

State-Wide

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	11,301	1.87%	32.51%	-0.15%
R	11,921	2.15%	29.79%	-0.05%
NP	17,492	3.16%	30.12%	0.24%
IAP	2,382	2.98%	4.33%	0.03%
LIB	421	2.58%	0.88%	0.00%
Other	-371	-0.82%	2.36%	-0.08%
Total not D or R			37.70%	0.19%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Clark County

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	8,738	1.87%	35.27%	-0.21%
R	8,617	2.53%	25.89%	0.02%
NP	13,346	3.26%	31.27%	0.24%
IAP	1,859	3.40%	4.19%	0.04%
LIB	274	2.67%	0.78%	0.00%
Other	-363	-1.02%	2.60%	-0.09%
Total not D or R			38.84%	0.19%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Washoe County

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	2,296	2.38%	31.69%	-0.08%
R	2,219	2.20%	33.05%	-0.14%
NP	2,954	3.57%	27.43%	0.25%
IAP	374	2.72%	4.53%	0.00%
LIB	102	2.86%	1.17%	0.00%
Other	21	0.32%	2.12%	-0.05%
Total not D or R			35.25%	0.20%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

Rural Counties (See rural county table below district tables)

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	267	0.65%	17.74%	-0.09%
R	1,085	0.98%	47.91%	-0.09%
NP	1,192	1.92%	27.01%	0.20%
IAP	149	1.31%	4.91%	0.01%
LIB	45	1.78%	1.10%	0.01%
Other	-29	-0.92%	1.34%	-0.03%
Total not D or R			34.36%	0.19%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

18 – 34 Year Old

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	4,201	2.59%	31.06%	-0.12%
R	3,150	3.41%	17.83%	0.08%
NP	7,309	3.32%	42.40%	0.14%
IAP	771	3.46%	4.30%	0.02%
LIB	179	2.51%	1.36%	-0.01%
Other	-150	-0.91%	3.04%	-0.12%
Total not D or R			51.11%	0.03%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

55+

Party	Change in # Voters	% Change	% Voter Share	Difference in Voter Share %
D	3,087	1.18%	34.55%	-0.16%
R	4,243	1.43%	39.20%	-0.08%
NP	4,331	2.88%	20.22%	0.24%
IAP	706	2.26%	4.17%	0.03%
LIB	51	1.68%	0.40%	0.00%
Other	-31	-0.28%	1.46%	-0.03%
Total not D or R			26.25%	0.25%

Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.

By district voter share changes.

Congressional Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	4	0	0
Republican	1	1	2
NP	0	4	0
IAP	0	4	0
LIB	0	0	4
Other	4	0	0

In all Congressional districts (100 percent of the districts) the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In three (75%) of the districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

State Senate Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	21	0	0
Republican	11	9	1
NP	0	21	0
IAP	1	17	3
LIB	4	7	10
Other	21	0	0

In all 21 districts (100%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In 11 (52.38%) of the 21 districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

State Assembly Districts

Party	# Districts Lose Voter Share	# Districts Gain Voter Share	# Districts No Change
Democratic	42	0	0
Republican	22	19	1
NP	0	42	0
IAP	5	33	4
LIB	10	17	15
Other	42	0	0

In all 42 districts (100%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.

In 23 (54.76%) of the 42 districts the percentage of voters not registered as Democratic or Republican is the leading group of voters.

Rural Counties

Party	# Counties Lose Voter Share	# Counties Gain Voter Share	# Counties No Change
Democratic	10	4	1
Republican	10	5	0
NP	1	14	0
IAP	5	9	1
LIB	3	7	5
Other	12	1	2

How did registration trends impact the election outcome? I’ll be writing about that as soon as the secretary of state posts the final turnout data.