News
Results: The Most Detailed Maps of the Iowa Republican Caucuses
No vote estimates available.
Map is colored by the candidate who leads in each precinct. Lightly shaded areas are more sparsely populated.
Former president Donald J. Trump won the Iowa caucuses on Monday, with The Associated Press calling the race for Mr. Trump less than an hour after caucusing began. The state Republican party is reporting precinct-level results. This is the most detailed vote data available for the first 2024 presidential election contest.
The map above shows the leading candidate in each precinct. It is shaded according to the number of votes per square mile for that candidate, meaning sparsely populated areas where fewer caucusgoers live are lighter, and denser areas are darker.
How the top three candidates are doing in each precinct
Here’s another way to look at the results. In the maps below, precincts are shaded according to each candidate’s vote share for the three top candidates — Mr. Trump, Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor, and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida.
How Republicans are voting in different kinds of areas
This table shows the leading candidate in precincts that have reported votes, based on the demographics of those areas.
Lower income areas
Higher income areas Areas with fewer college graduates
Areas with more college graduates
Rural areas
Suburban areas
Urban areas
Precincts in…
Leader margin
Avg. vote share
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Trump’s support
Mr. Trump improved significantly on his performance in the Iowa caucuses in 2016, when he received 24.3 percent of the vote, losing to Ted Cruz, who received 27.6 percent. Mr. Trump gained ground in many kinds of areas, but most of all in areas with lower average incomes and fewer college graduates.
Vote share for Trump in precincts …
Trump’s Iowa performance in 2016 compared with 2024
Each dot in the charts below represents one neighborhood’s caucus precinct. The dots are positioned on the charts based on the percentage of the vote each candidate received in that precinct.
Mr. Trump’s strength on Monday has cut across many different kinds of areas. His lead is most pronounced in areas with fewer college-educated voters.
Precincts in…
Lower income areas
Areas with fewer college graduates
Areas with more college graduates
DeSantis’s support
Mr. DeSantis is a distant second, trailing Mr. Trump by double digits. Mr. DeSantis, despite campaigning in all 99 Iowa counties, and earning the endorsement of key state officials and religious leaders, has not found consistent pockets of support among key demographic groups.
Precincts in …
Lower income areas
Areas with fewer college graduates
Areas with more college graduates
Haley’s support
Ms. Haley has performed her best in areas that are wealthier and have a higher concentration of college-educated voters. These include precincts that surround cities like Des Moines and Iowa City.
Methodology
Higher income areas are precincts where the median household income is $100,000 or more; lower income areas are where the median household income is less than $50,000. Areas with more college graduates are precincts where more than 40 percent of the population has a college education; areas with fewer college graduates are precincts where less than 15 percent of the population graduated college. The classification of areas as urban, rural or suburban is derived from research by Jed Kolko.
Chris Christie dropped out of the presidential race last week, but the Iowa Republican Party will still tabulate any votes he receives in the caucuses.
Election results are from The Associated Press. The Times publishes its own estimates for the number of remaining votes, based on historic turnout data and reporting from results providers. These are only estimates, and they may not be informed by reports from election officials. Precincts in …
Lower income areas
Areas with fewer college graduates
Areas with more college graduates
News
Utah County declares State of Emergency as wildfires ‘ravage’ the state
UTAH COUNTY, Utah (ABC4) — Utah County has declared a state of emergency.
According to an announcement from the Utah County Commissioner Skyler Beltran, the county is in a dire position due to the extensive wildfires in the area and high fire risk.
The announcement states that declaring the State of Emergency will allow the county to access additional resources, and notes there is no imminent threat to Utah County residents.
“We have utilized a tremendous amount of our resources (very early in the traditional fire season schedule) responding to the Iron Fire and continue to face ongoing recovery concerns,” the statement read. “This was even before the Maple Peak and Cherry fires, which have now merged and are moving toward the Iron Fire.”
The Iron Fire, which started last week, has burned over 40,000 acres. Around 22,830 of those acres were in Utah County. Reportedly, the county has limited resources available to help those who are evacuating from Juab County, including the 600 residents in the Town of Eureka.
Due to the influx in evacuees, the Utah County Commission says that more resources are necessary to help the evacuation shelters in Elberta, Utah. Additionally, due to the Iron Fire and other wildfires, Utah County is facing immense repair needs to avoid future flooding, loss of homes, and disruption to local economies and ecosystems.
There is “imminent threat” to public safety due to the damage.
The commission also asks the public to be vigilant when handling heavy equipment, using campfires or barbecues, and discharging fireworks, to avoid preventing fires.
Their statement added, “Our firefighters are exhausted, our resources are stretched thin and we are in a very vulnerable position.”
News
A day after Alito’s testy response to Sotomayor’s dissent, court says it was a ‘misunderstanding’
The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor (seated left) and Justice Samuel Alito (seated second from right).
Alex Wong/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Wong/Getty Images
As the Supreme Court heads into the announcement of its final and hugely important opinions next week, there are reverberations from this week’s announcements, and Justice Samuel Alito’s public rebuke of his colleague Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
On Thursday, Justice Alito summarized from the bench three very big opinions he authored for the court’s six justice conservative majority. Alito, unlike most of his colleagues, doesn’t spend much time on these summaries. And it is rare that a justice has three big opinions to announce, but it is almost the end of the term, and there are a lot of big cases still outstanding.
The first case he announced came and went. Alito then moved on to a second case, this one tests whether migrants may apply for asylum in the U.S. by going to one of several ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexican border, and presenting themselves for admission. This entails presenting documents that persuade an asylum officer that applicants’ fear of persecution in their home country is credible enough to allow them to enter the U.S. while their asylum application is processed. Alito’s opinion ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s policy of refusing all such applicants by blocking them at the border. It was a policy also followed at one time by the Obama administration until it was blocked by the lower courts.
After Alito finished his summary of the opinion, he paused, at which point Justice Sotomayor read a summary of her contrary views in dissent. When she finished, however, Justice Alito did not move on to the announcement of his third opinion. Instead, he did something that nobody in the press corps ever remembers happening before. Looking much as if he had just bitten into a lemon, Alito said, “There is much that I would have added to my bench statement had I known there would be a dissent read.” And he then went on to a short extemporaneous rebuttal.
What caused the hissy fit? Did Sotomayor really fail to tell him she would have an oral dissent? That really would have been a breach of the court’s practices. A justice typically notifies the chief justice and the author of the majority opinion in writing if there is to be an oral dissent.
In response Friday to an inquiry from NPR came this terse statement from the court’s public information office.
“Justice Alito was notified in advance by Justice Sotomayor’s chambers that she would be reading a dissent from the bench. It was a misunderstanding on Justice Alito’s part.”
News
“It’s blood money”: Family of exonerated man in Texas yogurt shop murders speaks out after settlement
The widow and the daughter of Maurice Pierce, one of the four men wrongfully accused in the 1991 Texas yogurt shop murders, have confirmed they signed a multimillion-dollar settlement with the city of Austin.
Kimberli and Marisa Pierce spoke with correspondent Erin Moriarty in a new episode of the podcast “48 Hours: Case by Case.” Moriarty has reported on the yogurt shop murders for over 30 years.
Maurice Pierce’s widow Kimberli made clear that their priority has never been financial compensation. “It’s blood money for us. He died for this money,” Kimberli Pierce said. “It’s about the reform and the changes that need to happen, not only in Austin, but apparently across the country.”
They also went into great detail about what they believe happened when Maurice Pierce was shot and killed by police in 2010.
Maurice Pierce was one of four men, along with Michael Scott, Robert Springsteen and Forrest Welborn, who were wrongfully accused in the murders of four teenage girls in Austin on Dec. 6, 1991. Eliza Thomas, Amy Ayers, and sisters Jennifer and Sarah Harbison were tied up, shot and left inside the yogurt shop as it was set ablaze.
The four men were exonerated in February after investigators linked another man, Robert Eugene Brashers, to the killings. The city of Austin subsequently offered a $35 million settlement. Because Maurice Pierce died in 2010, his share of $10 million will go to Kimberli and Marisa Pierce.
Eight days after the killings, 16-year-old Maurice Pierce was arrested at a mall, carrying a .22, the same caliber handgun connected to the crime. Kimberli Pierce said police told Maurice Pierce that his gun was the murder weapon. He responded by mentioning his friend Forrest Welborn. Maurice Pierce was then wired up and sent to speak with Welborn, but investigators ultimately determined that Welborn and the others knew nothing about the murders, and no charges were filed at that time.
Marisa Pierce has said there was no evidence when her father was questioned, “only a detective and a narrative, a narrative so completely false. It feels evil.”
Nearly eight years later, in 1999, all four men were arrested after Scott and Springsteen confessed to the murders. They later recanted, saying they had been coerced. Springsteen and Scott were tried and convicted, but later those convictions were overturned on constitutional grounds. A subsequent DNA test excluded all four men. Maurice Pierce was never convicted but spent three years in jail before his release in 2003.
Kimberli Pierce said her husband came home a hardened man. She believes police continued to harass Maurice and their family after his release. In 2010, Maurice Pierce was stopped for a routine traffic stop, fled on foot, and was shot and killed by an Austin police officer who said Pierce had stabbed him with a knife.
Marisa and Kimberli Pierce told “48 Hours” that they intend to review the circumstances surrounding the night of Maurice Pierce’s death. Marisa Pierce revealed in new, emotional detail that she was on the phone with her father at the time. She believes he panicked and was only trying to get away, not to hurt anyone. She described her father’s last breaths: “And in those last moments, he had just said I’m sorry, I don’t think you’re gonna see me again, and I love you.”
“48 Hours” reached out to the Austin Police Department about the Pierces’ allegations of harassment and their questions about Maurice Pierce’s death in 2010. The police department said they had no additional comment.
For the Pierce family, the settlement is a starting point, not an end point. They have put forward seven proposed reforms they hope the city of Austin will approve, including appointing a child advocate whenever a minor is questioned, prohibiting deceptive interrogation tactics, educating juveniles about their rights and establishing accountability measures to address tunnel vision in police investigations.
In a statement shared with “48 Hours,” the Pierces wrote: “Real justice is not only about acknowledging harm after the fact but about creating safeguards that prevent future families from enduring the same pain.”
-
Lifestyle2 minutes agoAmateurs now conduct most weddings. Here is some basic advice
-
Technology12 minutes agoIt’s the last day of Prime Day — here are over 140 great deals to choose from
-
World17 minutes agoRubio announces framework deal between Israel and Lebanon as experts warn Iran will fight to sabotage it
-
Politics24 minutes agoLawyer who beat Hawaii gun law calls state’s reliance on Black Code ‘disgraceful’
-
Sports32 minutes ago2026 World Cup Group Scenarios: What Remaining Teams Need To Advance To Round of 32
-
Technology39 minutes agoOhio robot cop retires after zero arrests
-
Business42 minutes agoCommentary: Puncturing the myth of Alan Greenspan, whose policies gave us the Great Recession
-
Entertainment47 minutes agoOn 10th anniversary, Boleros de Noche’s legacy is celebrated by L.A. City Hall