Latest status of election related bills in the 2023
Non Major Party Voters Now Largest Segment in Two-Thirds of State Legislative Districts
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – March 1, 2023
With the increase of active voters registered as Non-Partisan in February, the segment of active voters not registered to vote in either the Democratic or Republican Party is now the largest group of voters in two-thirds (66.67 percent) of all state legislative districts. That segment remains the largest bloc statewide, in Clark and Washoe county, and is now just under 52 percent among voters 18 – 34 years of age.
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 1,253 | 0.21% | 32.16% | -0.13% |
| R | 1,027 | 0.19% | 29.71% | -0.13% |
| NP | 8,481 | 1.51% | 30.61% | 0.27% |
| IAP | 624 | 0.77% | 4.36% | 0.01% |
| LIB | 103 | 0.64% | 0.87% | 0.00% |
| Other | -20 | -0.05% | 2.28% | -0.02% |
| Total not D or R | 38.13% | 0.26% |
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 | 1,317 | 0.29% | 34.90% | -0.15% |
| R | 911 | 0.27% | 25.80% | -0.12% |
| NP | 6,846 | 1.65% | 31.81% | 0.29% |
| IAP | 461 | 0.83% | 4.21% | 0.00% |
| LIB | 75 | 0.74% | 0.77% | 0.00% |
| Other | -15 | -0.05% | 2.50% | -0.02% |
| Total not D or R | 39.30% | 0.27% |
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 | -41 | -0.04% | 31.58% | -0.09% |
| R | 20 | 0.02% | 33.06% | -0.07% |
| NP | 677 | 0.82% | 27.57% | 0.16% |
| IAP | 62 | 0.45% | 4.56% | 0.01% |
| LIB | 8 | 0.23% | 1.16% | 0.00% |
| Other | -4 | -0.06% | 2.05% | -0.01% |
| Total not D or R | 35.35% | 0.16 |
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 | -23 | -0.06% | 17.47% | -0.10% |
| R | 96 | 0.09% | 47.48% | -0.19% |
| NP | 958 | 1.49% | 27.73% | 0.27% |
| IAP | 101 | 0.88% | 4.92% | 0.02% |
| LIB | 20 | 0.78% | 1.10% | 0.00% |
| Other | -1 | -0.03% | 1.30% | -0.01% |
| Total not D or R | 35.05% | 0.28% |
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 | 167 | 0.11% | 30.50% | -0.21% |
| R | 62 | 0.07% | 17.64% | -0.13% |
| NP | 3,813 | 1.72% | 43.33% | 0.39% |
| IAP | 139 | 0.63% | 4.29% | -0.01% |
| LIB | 23 | 0.33% | 1.34% | -0.01% |
| Other | -47 | -0.31% | 2.90% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 51.86% | 0.34% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 528 | 0.20% | 34.28% | -0.09% |
| R | 668 | 0.23% | 39.06% | -0.09% |
| NP | 2,005 | 1.30% | 20.61% | 0.17% |
| IAP | 231 | 0.73% | 4.21% | 0.01% |
| LIB | 35 | 1.15% | 0.41% | 0.00% |
| Other | -1 | -0.01% | 1.42% | -0.01% |
| Total not D or R | 26.66% | 0.17% |
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 | 3 | 1 |
| 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 | 21 | 0 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 21 | 0 |
| IAP | 4 | 11 | 6 |
| LIB | 3 | 3 | 15 |
| 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 14 (66.67%) 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 | 42 | 0 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 42 | 0 |
| IAP | 10 | 23 | 9 |
| LIB | 11 | 9 | 22 |
| Other | 37 | 2 | 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 29 (66.67%) 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 | 13 | 1 | 1 |
| Republican | 14 | 1 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 15 | 0 |
| IAP | 4 | 8 | 3 |
| LIB | 2 | 3 | 10 |
| Other | 7 | 1 | 7 |
The voter share of those not registered to either the Democratic or Republican Party increased in 14 of the 15 rural counties with an average share of 33.10 percent (range 23.67 to 39.87)
On March 4, 2023, the Nevada Democratic Party will hold its state party leadership election. There has been a lot of media attention given to the friction between the current leadership and the challenging slate. I have to pose the question; could the result of the election have an impact on voter share in the coming month?
Voter Roll Maintenance Benefits GOP
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – February 2, 2023
Voter rolls underwent routine maintenance in January with the resulting changes benefiting the Republican Party with Non-Partisan benefiting in the rural counties and among younger voters. However, the overall status of voter share did not change with those not registered in either the Democratic or Republican Party (registered as Non-Partisan or in a minor party) still being the largest segment statewide, in Clark and Washoe counties, and among voters 18 to 34 years of age with Non-Partisan being the largest in that group. Only among voters 55 years of age and older is this voter share percentage under 30 percent.
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -19,404 | -3.14% | 32.30% | -0.10% |
| R | -12,954 | -2.29% | 29.84% | 0.17% |
| NP | -16,863 | -2.91% | 30.35% | -0.02% |
| IAP | -2,299 | -2.77% | 4.35% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -616 | -3.67% | 0.87% | -0.01% |
| Other | -2,196 | -4.91% | 2.29% | -0.05% |
| Total not D or R | 37.87% | -0.08% |
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 | -15,083 | -3.16% | 35.05% | -0.06% |
| R | -8,617 | -2.46% | 25.92% | 0.15% |
| NP | -13,366 | -3.12% | 31.53% | -0.03% |
| IAP | -1,661 | -2.91% | 4.21% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -432 | -4.09% | 0.77% | -0.01% |
| Other | -1,730 | -4.95% | 2.52% | -0.05% |
| Total not D or R | 39.03% | -0.09% |
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 | -3,988 | -4.02% | 31.67% | 0.01% |
| R | -3,853 | -3.73% | 33.14% | 0.12% |
| NP | -3,698 | -4.30% | 27.42% | -0.07% |
| IAP | -584 | -4.10% | 4.55% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -180 | -4.91% | 1.16% | -0.01% |
| Other | -419 | -6.34% | 2.06% | -0.05% |
| Total not D or R | 35.19% | -0.13 |
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 | -333 | -0.80% | 17.56% | -0.09% |
| R | -484 | -0.43% | 47.67% | -0.06% |
| NP | 201 | 0.31% | 27.46% | 0.17% |
| IAP | -54 | -0.47% | 4.90% | -0.01% |
| LIB | -4 | -0.16% | 1.09% | 0.00% |
| Other | -47 | -1.51% | 1.31% | -0.02% |
| Total not D or R | 34.76% | 0.14% |
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 | -7,787 | -4.67% | 30.71% | -0.16% |
| R | -3,810 | -3.98% | 17.77% | 0.03% |
| NP | -8,557 | -3.71% | 42.94% | 0.21% |
| IAP | -979 | -4.22% | 4.30% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -326 | -4.46% | 1.35% | 0.00% |
| Other | -1,044 | -6.44% | 2.93% | -0.07% |
| Total not D or R | 51.52% | 0.14% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -5,251 | -1.98% | 34.37% | -0.09% |
| R | -4,777 | -1.59% | 39.15% | 0.05% |
| NP | -2,316 | -1.48% | 20.44% | 0.05% |
| IAP | -460 | -1.43% | 4.20% | 0.01% |
| LIB | -54 | -1.74% | 0.40% | 0.00% |
| Other | -397 | -3.55% | 1.43% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 26.48% | 0.03% |
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 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| NP | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| IAP | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| LIB | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | 12 | 7 | 2 |
| Republican | 4 | 17 | 0 |
| NP | 10 | 11 | 0 |
| IAP | 7 | 12 | 2 |
| LIB | 12 | 2 | 7 |
| 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 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 | 23 | 18 | 1 |
| Republican | 10 | 32 | 0 |
| NP | 20 | 22 | 0 |
| IAP | 18 | 17 | 7 |
| LIB | 25 | 6 | 11 |
| Other | 41 | 0 | 1 |
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 | 9 | 5 | 1 |
| Republican | 11 | 4 | 0 |
| NP | 3 | 12 | 0 |
| IAP | 11 | 4 | 0 |
| LIB | 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Other | 4 | 2 | 9 |
As I write this the start of the legislative session is four days away. Will the status of voter registration be on the minds of legislators opening up more collaboration or will they stick to party lines on the important issues facing the state? We will know very soon.
Random Thoughts – Opinion
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – January 27, 2023
As we head in to the 2023 Nevada legislative session, I wanted to put out a few random thoughts.
November saw the first passage of Question 3, an amendment to the Nevada constitution that, if passed by the voters a second time in 2024, will replace our current closed primary system with a top-five nonpartisan open primary and ranked choice voting in the general election. Nevada voters are ready to take control of their elections again as evidenced by 53 percent of voters voting “yes”. Look for the campaign to focus on clarifying just how simple and easy the proposed Final Five Voting process is and how the process benefits all Nevadans.
What about the election just completed.
Just under 55 percent of active registered voters cast ballots. This is about average for mid-term elections, but disappointing given mail ballots were sent to all active voters. Since Nevada still maintains in-person voting, the question of cost benefit has to asked. Assembly Bill 321 (AB 321) approved by the legislature last session making the temporary system of mailing ballots to all active voters put in place for the 2020 election due to COVID did not include any money for voter education. The result was voter confusion as shown by the number of ballots that were either returned, rejected, or in need of correction (curing). It is important to note that prior to 2020, Nevada had no excuse absentee voting, anyone could request a mail ballot. In 2019 a major change that allowed a voter to be placed on a permanent list to receive a mail ballot for all elections instead of having to submit a new request for each election was enacted.
Mailing ballots to all voters has become a hot-button issue whether deservedly so or not. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.) rated Nevada 13th following the 2020 election for election administration, meaning we are doing things right.
Perhaps going back to the pre-AB 321 process and using the money required to mail ballots to all, some $14 million, to address some of the valid issues; voter roll maintenance and voter education is worth considering.
The level of emotion connected with all mail ballots also inspired some counties to propose going back to hand-marked paper ballots and manual counting of the votes. This is allowed under current election statute (NRS293B.050). However, the legislature has ordered the secretary of state to change the voter registration and voter roll maintenance process to one controlled by the secretary of state instead of the individual counties (top-down instead of bottom-up) Instead of each county reporting to the secretary of state, the secretary of state would provide the data to the counties. Given this change, the state cannot risk having 17 different voting and tabulation processes. To keep the process standardized and therefor more efficient and accurate, something I believe is supported by both Democratic and Republican voters alike, the law allowing counties to use different methods needs to be changed so all counties use the same voting and tabulation methods.
Another hot-button issue is requiring voters to show valid identification to vote. Is this a solution looking for a problem? Yes. Does the issue impact the legislature from solving other, more important issues? Yes. Is there a fix that could remove this issue and its effect on our political environment? Yes.
Polls suggest that most voters, whether a proponent of voter ID requirements or not, would not object to showing an ID to vote. The proposals being presented this session will include a wide variety of acceptable identification documents all centered around the documents required to be presented to register to vote. For those lacking any of the numerous acceptable identification county clerks or registrar of voters would provide a voting identification free of charge.
Because of the partisan emotion surrounding the issues of mail ballots and voter ID, it is unlikely bills presenting potential solutions will advance. Food for thought, shouldn’t we try to remove obstacles to progress rather than strengthening walls? What would happen if pragmatism won out over partisanship?
During this last election cycle, all election administration offices saw key people and staff leave. Going into 2023, both the Clark and Washoe county registrar of voters is new. The secretary of state and county election offices are trying to hire new staff and have them trained in time for the February 2024 presidential preference primary; there will be three elections in 2024. Educating voters to this fact will play a major role impacting turnout for the state primary in June. Hopefully the required funds will be approved by the legislature.
Random thoughts.
Non-Partisan and Minor Party Growth Ends 2022 on Familiar Ground
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% |
Voters Split Tickets and Continue to Leave Major Parties in November
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.
As Early Voting Begins Non-Partisan Overtakes GOP in Voter Share
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – November 3, 2022
As I write this the two weeks of early voting ends tomorrow and election day is five days away. While Non-Partisan voter share has exceed that of the Republican Party among voters 18 to 34 years of age for quite some time and more recently in Clark County, October voter registration now puts GOP voter share below Non-Partisan statewide for the first time.
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 23 of 42 state assembly; 54.76%)
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 12,637 | 2.13% | 32.66% | -0.21% |
| R | 10,439 | 1.92% | 29.84% | -0.25% |
| NP | 22,937 | 4.32% | 29.87% | 0.44% |
| IAP | 1,940 | 2.49% | 4.31% | -0.01% |
| LIB | 433 | 2.72% | 0.88% | 0.00% |
| Other | -56 | -0.12% | 2.44% | -0.07% |
| Total not D or R | 37.50% | 0.36% |
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 | 8,704 | 1.90% | 35.47% | -0.21% |
| R | 5,985 | 1.79% | 25.88% | -0.18% |
| NP | 16,440 | 4.19% | 31.03% | 0.50% |
| IAP | 1,120 | 2.09% | 4.15% | -0.02% |
| LIB | 221 | 2.20% | 0.78% | 0.00% |
| Other | -223 | -0.62% | 2.69% | -0.08% |
| Total not D or R | 38.65% | 0.40% |
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 | 3,372 | 3.62% | 31.77% | -0.08% |
| R | 2,813 | 2.87% | 33.19% | -0.32% |
| NP | 4,213 | 5.37% | 27.18% | 0.39% |
| IAP | 614 | 4.67% | 4.52% | 0.03% |
| LIB | 157 | 4.61% | 1.17% | 0.01% |
| Other | 166 | 2.58% | 2.17% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 35.04% | 0.39% |
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 | 561 | 1.38% | 17.83% | -0.26% |
| R | 1,641 | 1.50% | 48.00% | -0.65% |
| NP | 2,284 | 3.82% | 26.82% | 0.24% |
| IAP | 206 | 1.85% | 4.90% | -0.05% |
| LIB | 55 | 2.23% | 1.09% | -0.01% |
| Other | 1 | 0.03% | 1.37% | -0.04% |
| Total not D or R | 34.17% | 0.14% |
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 | 1,964 | 1.22% | 31.17% | -0.03% |
| R | 1,113 | 1.22% | 17.76% | -0.02% |
| NP | 3,667 | 1.69% | 42.26% | 0.15% |
| IAP | 239 | 1.08% | 4.28% | -0.01% |
| LIB | 76 | 1.08% | 1.37% | 0.00% |
| Other | -258 | -1.54% | 3.16% | -0.09% |
| Total not D or R | 51.07% | 0.05% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 3,137 | 1.21% | 34.71% | -0.04% |
| R | 3,711 | 1.27% | 39.28% | -0.03% |
| NP | 2,504 | 1.69% | 19.97% | 0.07% |
| IAP | 551 | 1.80% | 4.14% | 0.02% |
| LIB | 50 | 1.67% | 0.40% | 0.00% |
| Other | 14 | 0.12% | 1.49% | -0.02% |
| Total not D or R | 26.01% | 0.07% |
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 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| LIB | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 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 | 21 | 0 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 21 | 0 |
| IAP | 12 | 5 | 4 |
| LIB | 8 | 6 | 7 |
| 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 | 40 | 1 | 1 |
| NP | 0 | 42 | 0 |
| IAP | 19 | 11 | 12 |
| LIB | 15 | 13 | 14 |
| Other | 41 | 0 | 1 |
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 | 14 | 1 | 0 |
| Republican | 14 | 1 | 0 |
| NP | 1 | 14 | 0 |
| IAP | 7 | 4 | 4 |
| LIB | 7 | 5 | 3 |
| Other | 10 | 3 | 2 |
How this translate into election results is anybody’s guess. Jon Ralston, CEO of the Nevada Independent, breaks down turnout here.
Heading to General Election Non-Partisan Voter Share Increase Continues
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – October 7, 2022
With one month to go before election day, both the Democratic and Republican Party continued to lose voter share in September while Non-Partisan gained not only voter share but led in raw number growth as well. Combined Non-Partisan and minor party voter share continues to be the largest segment in the state, both Clark and Washoe county, and among voters 18 to 34 years of age (over 51 percent with 42 percent Non-Partisan). This pattern continues in all 17 counties and all legislative districts.
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 6,428 | 1.10% | 32.87% | -0.09% |
| R | 4,684 | 0.87% | 30.09% | -0.15% |
| NP | 13,733 | 2.66% | 29.43% | 0.37% |
| IAP | 1,182 | 1.54% | 4.32% | 0.01% |
| LIB | 242 | 1.55% | 0.88% | 0.00% |
| Other | -1,830 | -4.03% | 2.42% | -0.14% |
| Total not D or R | 37.04% | 0.22% |
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 | 5,072 | 1.12% | 35.68% | -0.13% |
| R | 2,679 | 0.81% | 26.06% | -0.18% |
| NP | 10,448 | 2.73% | 30.53% | 0.37% |
| IAP | 778 | 1.47% | 4.17% | 0.00% |
| LIB | 129 | 1.30% | 0.78% | 0.00% |
| Other | -178 | -0.50% | 2.78% | -0.06% |
| Total not D or R | 38.26% | 0.31% |
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 | 1,241 | 1.35% | 31.85% | -0.14% |
| R | 1,375 | 1.42% | 33.52% | -0.12% |
| NP | 2,071 | 2.71% | 26.79% | 0.24% |
| IAP | 331 | 2.58% | 4.49% | 0.03% |
| LIB | 84 | 2.53% | 1.16% | 0.01% |
| Other | 32 | 0.50% | 2.20% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 34.64% | 0.25% |
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 | 115 | 0.28% | 18.09% | 0.03% |
| R | 630 | 0.58% | 48.65% | 0.21% |
| NP | 1,214 | 2.07% | 26.57% | 0.50% |
| IAP | 73 | 0.66% | 4.95% | 0.03% |
| LIB | 29 | 1.19% | 1.10% | 0.01% |
| Other | -1,684 | -54.04% | 0.64% | -0.75% |
| Total not D or R | 33.26% | -0.21% |
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 | 2,640 | 1.67% | 31.20% | -0.11% |
| R | 1,007 | 1.11% | 17.77% | -0.16% |
| NP | 6,276 | 2.99% | 42.11% | 0.39% |
| IAP | 369 | 1.70% | 4.29% | -0.01% |
| LIB | 108 | 1.56% | 1.37% | -0.01% |
| Other | -160 | -0.95% | 3.25% | -0.10% |
| Total not D or R | 51.02% | 0.27% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | 2,339 | 0.91% | 34.75% | -0.06% |
| R | 2,172 | 0.75% | 39.31% | -0.13% |
| NP | 2,963 | 2.04% | 19.90% | 0.19% |
| IAP | 368 | 1.21% | 4.12% | 0.01% |
| LIB | 29 | 0.98% | 0.40% | 0.00% |
| Other | 38 | 0.34% | 1.51% | -0.01% |
| Total not D or R | 25.94% | 0.19% |
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 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| LIB | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 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 | 21 | 0 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 21 | 0 |
| IAP | 10 | 9 | 2 |
| LIB | 6 | 5 | 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 10 (47.62%) of the 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 | 41 | 1 | 0 |
| NP | 0 | 42 | 0 |
| IAP | 18 | 20 | 4 |
| LIB | 11 | 14 | 17 |
| 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 20 (47.62%) of the 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 | 14 | 1 | 0 |
| Republican | 10 | 5 | 0 |
| NP | 3 | 12 | 0 |
| IAP | 10 | 2 | 3 |
| LIB | 6 | 5 | 4 |
| Other | 11 | 0 | 4 |
As I write this, early voting begins in three weeks.
Voter Roll Maintenance Benefits Major Party Voter Share
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – September 10, 2022
August was a voter roll maintenance month and with the decrease in total active registered voters, the both the Democratic and Republican Party benefited in voter share. That said, the share of active voters not registered in either major party (Non-Partisan and minor party) remains the largest voting bloc in the state, in both Clark and Washoe counites, and increased its majority among voters 18 to 34 years of age. The only category where this group is below 30 percent is among voters 55 years of age and older. Even in the rural counties the average voter share of those not registered as either Democratic or Republican is at 32 percent.
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -12,067 | -2.02% | 32.96% | 0.05% |
| R | -9,765 | -1.78% | 30.24% | 0.12% |
| NP | -13,781 | -2.60% | 29.06% | -0.13% |
| IAP | -1,619 | -2.07% | 4.31% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -466 | -2.89% | 0.88% | -0.01% |
| Other | -1,704 | -3.62% | 2.55% | -0.04% |
| Total not D or R | 36.80% | -0.18% |
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 | -9,425 | -2.03% | 35.82% | 0.08% |
| R | -6,071 | -1.79% | 26.24% | 0.12% |
| NP | -10,767 | -2.74% | 30.16% | -0.15% |
| IAP | -1,182 | -2.19% | 4.17% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -323 | -3.16% | 0.78% | -0.01% |
| Other | -1,411 | -3.78% | 2.83% | -0.04% |
| Total not D or R | 37.95% | -0.20% |
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 | -1,631 | -1.74% | 31.99% | -0.01% |
| R | -1,717 | -1.74% | 33.64% | -0.01% |
| NP | -1,277 | -1.64% | 26.55% | 0.02% |
| IAP | -193 | -1.48% | 4.45% | 0.01% |
| LIB | -65 | -1.92% | 1.15% | 0.00% |
| Other | -119 | -1.82% | 2.23% | 0.00% |
| Total not D or R | 34.38% | 0.03% |
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 | -1,011 | -2.43% | 18.07% | -0.03% |
| R | -1,977 | -1.78% | 48.44% | 0.23% |
| NP | -1,737 | -2.88% | 26.07% | -0.17% |
| IAP | -244 | -2.16% | 4.92% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -78 | -3.10% | 1.09% | -0.01% |
| Other | -174 | -5.29% | 1.39% | -0.04% |
| Total not D or R | 33.47% | -0.22% |
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 | -1,551 | -0.97% | 31.31% | -0.13% |
| R | -716 | -0.79% | 17.94% | -0.04% |
| NP | 410 | 0.20% | 41.72% | 0.31% |
| IAP | -202 | -0.92% | 4.31% | -0.02% |
| LIB | -108 | -1.53% | 1.38% | -0.01% |
| Other | -633 | -3.61% | 3.35% | -0.11% |
| Total not D or R | 50.75% | 0.17% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -3,344 | -1.29% | 34.81% | -0.09% |
| R | -3,098 | -1.06% | 39.44% | -0.01% |
| NP | -628 | -0.43% | 19.72% | 0.12% |
| IAP | -233 | -0.76% | 4.12% | 0.01% |
| LIB | -48 | -1.59% | 0.40% | 0.00% |
| Other | -309 | -2.69% | 1.52% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 25.76% | 0.10% |
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 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| NP | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| IAP | 0 | 3 | 1 |
| LIB | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 5 | 15 | 1 |
| Republican | 2 | 19 | 0 |
| NP | 17 | 3 | 1 |
| IAP | 7 | 10 | 4 |
| LIB | 11 | 3 | 7 |
| Other | 20 | 1 | 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 eight (38.10%) of the 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 | 10 | 31 | 1 |
| Republican | 8 | 34 | 0 |
| NP | 36 | 6 | 0 |
| IAP | 16 | 19 | 7 |
| LIB | 20 | 5 | 17 |
| Other | 37 | 3 | 2 |
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 17 (40.48%) of the 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 | 15 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 9 | 5 | 1 |
| NP | 3 | 11 | 1 |
| IAP | 10 | 5 | 0 |
| LIB | 6 | 5 | 4 |
| Other | 12 | 0 | 3 |
In my opinion, something I don’t usually express in this column, I don’t put much emphasis on changes that are due to voters being removed from the active rolls. Changes in September should give a better perspective on what to expect on election day.
Post Primary – Major Parties Return to Voter Share Loses While Non-Partisans Gain
By Doug Goodman -Founder & Executive Director Nevadans for Election Reform – August 3, 2022
While more Democratic Party members migrate to the Republican Party, tracked by Jon Ralston CEO of the Nevada Independent voter registration numbers for July show a return to the normal trend; both major parties losing voter share while Non-Partisan gains. Washoe County was the only exception. In Washoe, the Democratic Party remained flat and the Republican Party registered an almost one-half of one percent gain. Voter share of those not registered as either Democratic or Republican remains the largest voting block statewide and in Clark and Washoe counties. Non-Partisan remains the largest group among voters 18 to 34 years of age and when combined with minor party registration is above 50 percent. This group is also the largest voting segment in three of the four Congressional Districts, nine of the 21 state senate districts, and 18 of the 42 state assembly districts.
State-Wide
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -9,353 | -1.54% | 32.91% | -0.17% |
| R | -8,702 | -1.56% | 30.12% | -0.16% |
| NP | 2,254 | 0.43% | 29.19% | 0.43% |
| IAP | -1,088 | -1.37% | 4.31% | -0.01% |
| LIB | -468 | -2.82% | 0.89% | -0.02% |
| Other | -1,720 | -3.52% | 2.59% | -0.07% |
| Total not D or R | 36.97% | 0.33% |
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 | -1,535 | -0.33% | 35.74% | -0.26% |
| R | -1,760 | -0.52% | 26.12% | -0.24% |
| NP | 9,095 | 2.37% | 30.31% | 0.59% |
| IAP | 173 | 0.32% | 4.17% | 0.00% |
| LIB | -40 | -0.39% | 0.79% | -0.01% |
| Other | -986 | -2.58% | 2.88% | -0.09% |
| Total not D or R | 38.15% | 0.49% |
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 | -7,224 | -7.16% | 32.00% | 0.01% |
| R | -6,148 | -5.88% | 33.65% | 0.47% |
| NP | -7,132 | -8.41% | 26.53% | -0.35% |
| IAP | -1,137 | -8.04% | 4.44% | -0.04% |
| LIB | -396 | -10.47% | 1.16% | -0.04% |
| Other | -659 | -9.18% | 2.23% | -0.05% |
| Total not D or R | 34.36% | -0.48% |
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 | -594 | -1.41% | 18.10% | -0.15% |
| R | -794 | -0.71% | 48.21% | -0.07% |
| NP | 291 | 0.48% | 26.24% | 0.28% |
| IAP | -124 | -1.08% | 4.92% | -0.03% |
| LIB | -32 | -1.25% | 1.10% | -0.01% |
| Other | -75 | -2.23% | 1.43% | -0.02% |
| Total not D or R | 33.69% | 0.22% |
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 | -3,850 | -2.36% | 31.45% | -0.34% |
| R | -2,664 | -2.84% | 17.98% | -0.28% |
| NP | 1,319 | 0.63% | 41.40% | 0.80% |
| IAP | -403 | -1.81% | 4.32% | -0.02% |
| LIB | -286 | -3.90% | 1.39% | -0.04% |
| Other | -874 | -4.75% | 3.46% | -0.12% |
| Total not D or R | 50.58% | 0.62% |
Other includes Green Party, Natural Law Party, other or not specified.
55+
| Party | Change in # Voters | % Change | % Voter Share | Difference in Voter Share % |
| D | -2,575 | -0.98% | 34.90% | -0.08% |
| R | -3,078 | -1.04% | 39.45% | -0.11% |
| NP | 666 | 0.46% | 19.60% | 0.24% |
| IAP | -376 | -1.22% | 4.11% | -0.02% |
| LIB | -51 | -1.67% | 0.41% | 0.00% |
| Other | -312 | -2.64% | 1.54% | -0.03% |
| Total not D or R | 25.65% | 0.19% |
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 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| IAP | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| LIB | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | 19 | 2 | 0 |
| Republican | 16 | 4 | 1 |
| NP | 4 | 17 | 0 |
| IAP | 17 | 2 | 2 |
| LIB | 14 | 5 | 2 |
| 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 nine (42.86%) of the 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 | 36 | 5 | 1 |
| Republican | 34 | 8 | 0 |
| NP | 6 | 36 | 0 |
| IAP | 27 | 12 | 3 |
| LIB | 25 | 10 | 7 |
| 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 18 (42.86%) of the 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 | 15 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 9 | 5 | 1 |
| NP | 3 | 11 | 1 |
| IAP | 10 | 5 | 0 |
| LIB | 6 | 5 | 4 |
| Other | 12 | 0 | 3 |
There is just under three months until early voting for the general election begins. If both the Democratic and Republican Party continue to lose voter share, how will that translate into election results?