Politics
Millions of Movers Reveal American Polarization in Action
Aside from their political views, Joshua Fisher and Ryan Troyer have a lot in common.
In 2020, they lived across the street from each other in Sioux Falls, S.D. They are both white men of a similar age. Mr. Fisher, 42, is an auto technician; Mr. Troyer, 39, is a sanitation worker. They are both married. They both have associate degrees.
They have something else in common, too: They both moved away from Sioux Falls. Mr. Troyer left in the fall of 2021, and Mr. Fisher about a year later.
In the process, they unwittingly became a part of a nationwide pattern that could matter in a close presidential election.
They made the country more geographically polarized.
Mr. Troyer, the Republican, moved to a more Republican neighborhood. Mr. Fisher, the Democrat, moved to a more Democratic one.
This is just one pair of voters, but they are part of a trend. Consider the moves of Republicans from relatively balanced neighborhoods like theirs:
The picture for Democrats is almost the reverse:
Put the two groups together, and you see political polarization in action.
These estimates, based on a New York Times analysis of detailed public voter registration records of more than 3.5 million Americans who moved since the last presidential election, offer a new and extraordinarily detailed glimpse into one of the ways that we segregate from each other — down to the street level.
Across all movers, Republicans chose neighborhoods Donald J. Trump won by an average of 19 percentage points in 2020, while Democrats chose neighborhoods President Biden won by the opposite margin (also 19 points). In total, movers started in neighborhoods 31 percentage points apart; they ended in neighborhoods 38 points apart. Across the country, the result is a widening gap between blue neighborhoods and red ones.
Where Democrats moved A solidly or heavily Biden place
A relatively balanced place
A solidly or heavily Trump place
Where Republicans moved A solidly or heavily Biden place
A relatively balanced place
A solidly or heavily Trump place
The independents and unaffiliated voters in our set picked more evenly balanced neighborhoods.
The different choices that movers made are not easily explained by things like voters’ ages, race, income or if they were leaving a rural or urban area. Even when narrowing our comparisons to demographically similar pairs of people from the same kinds of neighborhoods — people like Mr. Fisher and Mr. Troyer — Democrats and Republicans still chose neighborhoods that were 24 points apart in the 2020 vote.
Our analysis suggests partisanship itself, intentional or not, plays a powerful role when Americans uproot and find a new home. And their very personal decisions about where to resettle help power the churn of migration that is continuously reshaping American life at the neighborhood level and contributing to a sense that Americans are siloed in echo chambers, online and in their daily lives.
It also has real stakes for our elections: Political scientists say the more partisan a district or state becomes, the less a candidate needs to woo voters from the other party — or, after winning, govern on their behalf.
Interviews with 20 recent movers found that, consistent with research on the subject, politics alone did not drive a decision to move. But most we spoke to said it did influence their decision, and for some it topped the must-have list — the movers in our analysis are all registered to vote, and nearly all we spoke to intended to vote on Election Day.
Impact on the 2024 election
It’s unclear how much of a direct effect movers might have on the election next week. Each cycle, the electoral landscape changes in ways that have nothing to do with moving: People turn 18; people die; people change their minds or decide not to vote. But in an extraordinarily close race, even small shifts could prove decisive.
The 3.5 million movers in our analysis are a small number compared with the 158 million people who voted in 2020, but they do help explain some recent electoral trends — like Florida’s electoral shift to the right or the gains Democrats have made in Georgia.
In all but three states that voted for Mr. Biden in 2020, more Democrats have moved in than Republicans. The reverse is true for states Mr. Trump won — in all but one, more Republicans moved in.
Partisanship of incoming movers and the states they moved to Voters who moved into the 25 states Biden won in 2020 tended to be more Democratic than their neighbors.
And likewise, voters who moved into the 25 states Trump won tended to be more Republican than their neighbors.
In 36 states, polarization happened in both directions at once: More newcomers were of the winning party, and more of those who left were of the losing party.
Our analysis is an undercount of partisan migration; it may be missing some movers who haven’t yet filed a new address or registered to vote in their new homes. But it probably accounts for most voters who moved, and it shows how population shifts can have political consequences.
Consider Florida: Once a critical swing state, it has become more reliably Republican. Out of the 3.5 million voters we tracked, more than 200,000 registered Republicans have moved in over the past four years, more than twice the number of Democrats.
Mr. Biden won Georgia in 2020, the first time a Democrat won the state since 1992. Among more than 140,000 newcomers, Democrats outnumbered Republicans by more than 9,000. Over the same span, at least 10,000 more Republicans than Democrats moved out of the state — a third of them to Florida.
In Arizona, a state Mr. Biden won by less than 12,000 votes, incoming Republicans — a third of them from California — outnumbered incoming Democrats by a margin of three to two. Accounting for departures, Arizona gained about 17,000 Republican voters.
In all three Northern battlegrounds — Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan — Democrats made small gains through migration. In Pennsylvania, this year’s key battleground, Democratic gains actually came amid population loss: For both parties, more voters moved out than in. But Republicans lost more.
California has contributed to this trend in a different way: by exporting Republicans en masse. More Republicans have moved out of California than any other state. And those who did have made other states redder in the process — particularly Texas, Arizona, Florida and Nevada.
What drives moving
Tens of millions of Americans move each year, whether across town or across the country. Most of the voters in our set moved during the pandemic, when home sales surged and many Americans were ready for a change.
Mr. Troyer, the Republican from Sioux Falls, moved closer to his wife’s family in Minnesota. Mr. Fisher, the Democrat, moved to escape the harsh South Dakota winters.
Mr. Troyer, a Republican, on the front porch of his home outside Minneapolis, in a neighborhood that voted for Mr. Trump in 2020 by a wide margin.
Ben Brewer for The New York Times
And yet both ended up in places that were more partisan than where they came from, a phenomenon known as “sorting.” Research on partisanship and migration has found politics typically figures into the equation only indirectly — or even coincidentally.
Previous research has found that most people don’t intentionally seek out politically homogenous areas, but instead share similar preferences with people who vote as they do, with Democrats favoring cities and Republicans favoring the country, on average. A 2015 study, however, found that people favor properties in neighborhoods that reflect their partisan identity.
“Am I going to fit? Fittingness is a very important criteria for a place to live,” said James Gimpel, a politics professor at the University of Maryland, and co-author of the study. “Nobody wakes up in the morning and says, ‘Gee, I’m looking forward to having a fight with my neighbors.’”
Our analysis and interviews suggest just how intertwined political and lifestyle choices can be when it comes to choosing a new home, particularly since 2020.
Mr. Fisher, the Democrat, said that while he was eager to escape the snow, he also found the local politics increasingly oppressive. An outspoken liberal, with bumper stickers on his Jeep to match, he was eager to find a place that better reflected his sensibilities.
Mr. Fisher, a Democrat, finds his new home in Charlotte, N.C., “definitely bluer” and “a nice change,” he said.
Amanda Kathleen Greene for The New York Times
“For the most part, you just kind of kept to yourself,” Mr. Fisher, a South Dakota native, said of his old neighborhood, a precinct Mr. Biden won by five points. He says he feels more comfortable in his home in southwest Charlotte, in a precinct Mr. Biden carried by 46 points. “It’s definitely bluer than where we were before, and kind of a nice change,” he said.
And Mr. Troyer now lives in Otsego, northwest of Minneapolis, which Mr. Trump won by 27 points. Mr. Troyer said he chose his neighborhood because it was close to his job and family. While he did not intentionally seek out a conservative community, he feels at ease at home and at work. “Everybody I associate with is Republican,” he said. “Everybody at work, the hardworking kind, we’re all Republican.”
Characteristics of places Democrats were more likely to move to
Characteristics of places Republicans were more likely to move to
Movers who were…
Dem.
Rep.
Within 5 miles of a college
82%
65%
High racial diversity
62%
43%
Above avg. walkability
44%
18%
Within 5 miles of a Trader Joe’s
31%
10%
Avg. home price above $750k
19%
10%
Movers who were…
Dem.
Rep.
Property tax rate below 0.5%
64%
75%
Within 5 miles of a forest
36%
46%
Rural or a small town
22%
41%
Avg. temperature above 70° F
13%
24%
Somewhere to belong
For a handful of the people interviewed for this article, politics was the impetus.
Erin Thompson, 39, felt out of step as the lone Republican voice among her Seattle friends. Even dating was hard. “You want to find someone who has the same fundamental belief system as you,” she said. Absent that, “It’s just a little isolating.” In 2021, in search of warmer weather and a community more closely matching her worldview, she moved to Gilbert, a conservative Phoenix suburb.
Erin Thompson, a Republican, moved to Arizona after the 2020 election in search of more like-minded people.
Caitlin O’Hara for The New York Times
Romance was also a factor for Andrew Clohessey, 35, who moved to Minneapolis in 2021 from Cedar Falls, Iowa. He’d spent the previous year deliberately applying for jobs in liberal cities, eager to get out of an area that felt increasingly conservative to him, even though his precinct voted for Mr. Biden. He moved into a neighborhood with a lot of shops within walking distance, one that Mr. Biden carried by 61 points. “It’s been great,” he said. On dating apps he is now “more likely to match with people who have left-leaning political views.”
Naomi Hattaway in what will be a new house being built for her family in Atlanta.
Audra Melton for The New York Times
In contrast, Naomi Hattaway, 48, said politics “did not register one bit” when she moved for work to Fairburn, Ga., a suburb of Atlanta, from Omaha (after a stop in Florida). An independent who previously registered as a Democrat, she said diversity mattered more to her than party affiliation. She feels more at home as a Black mixed race woman in a city with a large Black population and a diverse local government. “It’s everything,” she said, adding that she is “better off living somewhere I belonged.”
All movers we spoke to felt politically comfortable in their new homes. Upon retiring, Robert LaRoche, 60, moved from Las Vegas to Spring Hill, Fla., about an hour north of Tampa to live closer to family. While the majority of his old neighbors in a precinct that voted for Mr. Biden by 41 points “did not align with our values,” he said, that’s not why he moved, nor was it why he chose his new home. He sees it as a bonus that he gets to live in a precinct that voted for Mr. Trump in 2020 by 26 points.
Mr. LaRoche’s sentiment is shared by more and more Americans — that life is less contentious when the people around you vote the way you do.
“Now I can talk to my neighbors about absolutely anything and not start a big argument,” he said.
Politics
Video: Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order
new video loaded: Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order
transcript
transcript
Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order
Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that would limit individual states in regulating the artificial intelligence industry.
-
“It’s a big part of the economy. There’s only going to be one winner here, and that’s probably going to be the U.S. or China. You have to have a central source of approval. When they need approvals on things, they have to come to one source. They can’t go to California, New York.” “We’re not going to push back on all of them. For example, kids’ safety — we’re going to protect. We’re not pushing back on that. But we’re going to push back on the most onerous examples of state regulations.”
By Shawn Paik
December 11, 2025
Politics
Kilmar Abrego Garcia seen for first time since release, pledges to ‘continue to fight’ Trump admin
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Salvadorean migrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia vowed Friday to “continue to fight and stand firm against all of the injustices this government has done upon me,” in his first appearance since being released from federal immigration custody.
Garcia spoke as he appeared for a check-in at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Baltimore, Maryland, as part of the terms of his release.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, right, listens with is brother Cesar Abrego Garcia during a rally ahead of a mandatory check at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Baltimore, on Friday, Dec. 12, 2025, after he was released from detention on Thursday under a judge’s order. (Stephanie Scarbrough/AP)
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered Abrego Garcia released from the ICE Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Philipsburg, Pa., on Thursday on the grounds that the Trump administration had not obtained the final notice of removal order that is needed to deport him to a third country, including a list of African nations they had previously identified for his removal.
“Since Abrego Garcia’s return from wrongful detention in El Salvador, he has been re-detained, again without lawful authority,” Xinis said in her order on Thursday.
The Justice Department is expected to challenge the order.
“This is naked judicial activism by an Obama appointed judge,” Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a social media post. “This order lacks any valid legal basis and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Thursday afternoon that the Trump administration would “absolutely” be appealing Xinis’ order, which she described as another instance of “activism” from a federal judge.
Abrego Garcia had been living in Maryland with his wife and children when he was initially arrested.
Abrego Garcia’s case epitomized the political firestorm that has ensued since March, when he was deported to El Salvador and housed in the country’s CECOT mega-prison, in violation of a 2019 court order and in what Trump officials acknowledge was an “administrative error.” Xinis ordered then that Abrego Garcia be “immediately” returned to the U.S.
Upon his return to the United Sates, Abrego Garcia was immediately taken into federal custody and detained on human smuggling charges that stemmed from a 2022 traffic stop.
The Trump administration has claimed he is a member of MS-13, which Abrego Garcia denies.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration previously tried and failed to deport him to the African nations of Liberia, Eswatini, Uganda and Ghana.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Politics
Commentary: Homeland Security says it doesn’t detain citizens. These brave Californians prove it has
Call it an accident, call it the plan. But don’t stoop to the reprehensible gaslighting of calling it a lie: It is fact that federal agents have detained and arrested dozens, if not hundreds, of United States citizens as part of immigration sweeps, regardless of what Kristi Noem would like us to believe.
During a congressional hearing Thursday, Noem, our secretary of Homeland Security and self-appointed Cruelty Barbie, reiterated her oft-used and patently false line that only the worst of the worst are being targeted by immigration authorities. That comes after weeks of her department posting online, on its ever-more far-right social media accounts, that claims of American citizens being rounded up and held incommunicado are “fake news” or a “hoax.”
“Stop fear-mongering. ICE does NOT arrest or deport U.S. citizens,” Homeland Security recently posted on the former Twitter.
Tuesday, at a different congressional hearing, a handful of citizens — including two Californians — told their stories of being grabbed by faceless masked men and being whisked away to holding cells where they were denied access to phones, lawyers, medications and a variety of other legal rights.
Their testimony accompanied the release of a congressional report by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in which 22 American citizens, including a dozen from the Golden State, told their own shocking, terrifying tales of manhandling and detentions by what can only be described as secret police — armed agents who wouldn’t identify themselves and often seemed to lack basic training required for safe urban policing.
These stories and the courageous Americans who are stepping forward to tell them are history in the making — a history I hope we regret but not forget.
Immigration enforcement, boosted by unprecedented amounts of funding, is about to ramp up even more. Noem and her agents are reveling in impunity, attempting to erase and rewrite reality as they go — while our Supreme Court crushes precedent and common sense to further empower this presidency. Until the midterms, there is little hope of any check on power.
Under those circumstances, for these folks to put their stories on the record is both an act of bravery and patriotism, because they now know better than most what it means to have the chaotic brutality of this administration focused on them. It’s incumbent upon the rest of us to hear them, and protest peacefully not only rights being trampled, but our government demanding we believe lies.
“I’ve always said that immigrants who are given the great privilege of becoming citizens are also some of the most patriotic people in this country. I know you all love your country. I love our country, and this is not the America that we believe in or that we fought so hard for. Every person, every U.S. citizen, has rights,” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) said as the hearing began.
L.A. native Andrea Velez, whose detention was reported on by my colleagues when it happened, was one of those putting herself on the line to testify.
Less than 5 feet tall, Velez is a graduate of Cal Poly Pomona who was working in the garment district in June when ICE began its raids. Her mom and teenage sister had just dropped her off when masked men swarmed out of unmarked cars and began chasing brown people. Velez didn’t know what was happening, but when one man charged her, she held up her work bag in defense. The bag did not protect her. Neither did her telling the agents she is a U.S. citizen.
“He handcuffed me without checking my ID. They ignored me as I repeated it again and again that I am a U.S. citizen,” she told committee members. “They did not care.”
Velez, still unsure who the man was who forced her into an SUV, managed to open the door and run to an LAPD officer, begging for help. But when the masked man noticed she was loose, he “ran up screaming, ‘She’s mine’” the congressional report says.
The police officer sent her back to the unmarked car, beginning a 48-hour ordeal that ended with her being charged with assault of a federal officer — charges eventually dropped after her lawyer demanded body camera footage and alleged witness statements. (The minority staff report was released by Rep. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, the highest-ranking Democrat on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.)
“I never imagined this would be occurring, here, in America,” Velez told lawmakers. “DHS likes … to brand us as criminals, stripping us of our dignity. They want to paint us as the worst of the worst, but the truth is, we are human beings with no criminal record.”
This if-you’re-brown-you’re-going-down tactic is likely to become more common because it is now legal.
In Noem vs. Vasquez Perdomo, a September court decision, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that it was reasonable for officers to stop people who looked foreign and were engaged in activities associated with undocumented people — such as soliciting work at a Home Depot or attending a Spanish-language event, as long as authorities “promptly” let the person go if they prove citizenship. These are now known as “Kavanaugh stops.”
Disregarding how racist and problematic that policy is, “promptly” seems to be up for debate.
Javier Ramirez, born in San Bernardino, testified as “a proud American citizen who has never known the weight of a criminal record.”
He’s a father of three who was working at his car lot in June when he noticed a strange SUV idling on his private property with a bunch of men inside. When he approached, they jumped out, armed with assault weapons, and grabbed him.
“This was a terrifying situation,” Ramirez said. But then it got worse.
One of the men yelled, “Get him. He’s Mexican!”
On video shot by a bystander, Javier can be heard shouting, “I have my passport!” according to the congressional report, but the agents didn’t care. When Ramirez asked why they were holding him, an agent told him, “We’re trying to figure that out.”
Like Velez, Ramirez was put in detention. A severe diabetic, he was denied medication until he became seriously ill, he told investigators. Though he asked for a lawyer, he was not allowed to contact one — but the interrogation continued.
After his release, five days later, he had to seek further medical treatment. He, too, was charged with assault of a federal agent, along with obstruction and resisting arrest. The bogus charges were also later dropped.
“I should not have to live in fear of being targeted simply for the color of my skin or the other language I speak,” he told the committee. “I share my story not just for myself, but for everyone who has been unjustly treated, for those whose voice has been silenced.”
You know the poem, folks. It starts when “they came” for the vulnerable. Thankfully, though people such as Ramirez and Velez may be vulnerable due to their pigmentation, they are not meek and they won’t be silenced. Our democracy, our safety as a nation of laws, depends on not just hearing their stories, but also standing peacefully against such abuses of power.
Because these abuses only end when the people decide they’ve had enough — not just of the lawlessness, but of the lies that empower it.
-
Alaska6 days agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Politics1 week agoTrump rips Somali community as federal agents reportedly eye Minnesota enforcement sweep
-
Ohio1 week ago
Who do the Ohio State Buckeyes hire as the next offensive coordinator?
-
Texas6 days agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
News1 week agoTrump threatens strikes on any country he claims makes drugs for US
-
World1 week agoHonduras election council member accuses colleague of ‘intimidation’
-
Washington3 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa5 days agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire