I know you’ve been waiting for this, and now here it is, the 2024 precinct data for Harris County. We’ll start at the top, with the Presidential race.
Dist Trump Harris Lib Grn
=========================================
CD02 101,141 73,399 1,112 1,027
CD07 64,912 107,843 1,304 2,409
CD08 74,503 72,990 872 2,104
CD09 34,807 98,435 700 1,192
CD18 65,672 154,657 1,370 1,818
CD22 17,265 12,134 218 382
CD29 61,054 92,821 721 1,096
CD36 96,291 61,494 946 1,463
CD38 207,050 134,998 2,484 3,626
SBOE4 156,315 333,525 2,652 4,197
SBOE6 323,580 287,004 4,467 6,807
SBOE7 1,907 4,901 35 44
SBOE8 240,893 183,341 2,573 4,069
SD04 77,379 53,764 803 740
SD06 79,118 115,748 977 1,427
SD07 214,518 149,459 2,388 4,288
SD11 80,390 48,049 795 1,237
SD13 41,326 135,852 887 1,669
SD15 122,588 207,855 2,418 3,093
SD17 77,097 69,258 1,106 1,832
SD18 30,279 28,786 353 831
HD126 47,139 32,436 510 1,017
HD127 53,316 39,288 583 457
HD128 46,960 20,817 346 238
HD129 51,343 35,661 582 1,098
HD130 62,583 30,561 615 746
HD131 11,732 33,982 209 359
HD132 52,744 39,625 648 1,230
HD133 41,018 35,523 610 992
HD134 37,235 63,272 895 1,238
HD135 29,444 34,545 385 943
HD137 12,173 17,605 165 454
HD138 40,490 34,014 543 776
HD139 18,545 41,960 354 521
HD140 12,554 17,762 128 183
HD141 9,583 29,578 159 278
HD142 16,425 36,709 265 316
HD143 16,443 21,747 154 239
HD144 21,279 20,063 212 323
HD145 20,209 40,418 533 532
HD146 12,844 43,675 328 522
HD147 15,749 50,150 381 664
HD148 24,177 28,843 351 463
HD149 21,481 26,741 222 809
HD150 47,229 33,796 549 719
CC1 104,664 272,796 2,431 3,414
CC2 154,001 146,258 1,623 2,457
CC3 297,453 208,610 3,395 4,646
CC4 166,577 181,107 2,278 4,600
JP1 88,363 161,860 2,011 2,318
JP2 38,454 41,483 375 755
JP3 57,172 61,550 556 540
JP4 235,442 185,842 2,650 3,687
JP5 205,376 204,871 2,688 5,537
JP6 9,903 23,143 190 335
JP7 20,445 89,638 553 992
JP8 67,540 40,384 704 953
HISD 149,076 317,057 3,219 4,663
Else 573,619 491,714 6,508 10,454
Dist Trump% Harris% Lib% Grn%
=========================================
CD02 57.21% 41.52% 0.63% 0.58%
CD07 36.75% 61.05% 0.74% 1.36%
CD08 49.48% 48.47% 0.58% 1.40%
CD09 25.73% 72.78% 0.52% 0.88%
CD18 29.36% 69.13% 0.61% 0.81%
CD22 57.49% 40.41% 0.73% 1.27%
CD29 39.19% 59.58% 0.46% 0.70%
CD36 60.08% 38.37% 0.59% 0.91%
CD38 59.43% 38.75% 0.71% 1.04%
SBOE4 31.45% 67.10% 0.53% 0.84%
SBOE6 51.99% 46.12% 0.72% 1.09%
SBOE7 27.66% 71.09% 0.51% 0.64%
SBOE8 55.87% 42.52% 0.60% 0.94%
SD04 58.29% 40.50% 0.60% 0.56%
SD06 40.08% 58.64% 0.49% 0.72%
SD07 57.84% 40.29% 0.64% 1.16%
SD11 61.58% 36.81% 0.61% 0.95%
SD13 22.97% 75.52% 0.49% 0.93%
SD15 36.46% 61.81% 0.72% 0.92%
SD17 51.60% 46.35% 0.74% 1.23%
SD18 50.23% 47.75% 0.59% 1.38%
HD126 58.08% 39.97% 0.63% 1.25%
HD127 56.90% 41.93% 0.62% 0.49%
HD128 68.67% 30.44% 0.51% 0.35%
HD129 57.86% 40.18% 0.66% 1.24%
HD130 66.18% 32.32% 0.65% 0.79%
HD131 25.33% 73.37% 0.45% 0.78%
HD132 55.93% 42.01% 0.69% 1.30%
HD133 52.45% 45.42% 0.78% 1.27%
HD134 36.24% 61.58% 0.87% 1.20%
HD135 45.04% 52.84% 0.59% 1.44%
HD137 39.99% 57.84% 0.54% 1.49%
HD138 53.35% 44.81% 0.72% 1.02%
HD139 30.19% 68.31% 0.58% 0.85%
HD140 40.97% 57.97% 0.42% 0.60%
HD141 24.19% 74.65% 0.40% 0.70%
HD142 30.56% 68.30% 0.49% 0.59%
HD143 42.58% 56.32% 0.40% 0.62%
HD144 50.79% 47.89% 0.51% 0.77%
HD145 32.73% 65.45% 0.86% 0.86%
HD146 22.36% 76.05% 0.57% 0.91%
HD147 23.50% 74.82% 0.57% 0.99%
HD148 44.87% 53.53% 0.65% 0.86%
HD149 43.60% 54.27% 0.45% 1.64%
HD150 57.36% 41.04% 0.67% 0.87%
CC1 27.28% 71.10% 0.63% 0.89%
CC2 50.57% 48.03% 0.53% 0.81%
CC3 57.82% 40.55% 0.66% 0.90%
CC4 46.94% 51.04% 0.64% 1.30%
JP1 34.68% 63.53% 0.79% 0.91%
JP2 47.41% 51.14% 0.46% 0.93%
JP3 47.69% 51.34% 0.46% 0.45%
JP4 55.03% 43.43% 0.62% 0.86%
JP5 49.04% 48.92% 0.64% 1.32%
JP6 29.46% 68.85% 0.57% 1.00%
JP7 18.30% 80.22% 0.49% 0.89%
JP8 61.60% 36.83% 0.64% 0.87%
HISD 31.42% 66.82% 0.68% 0.98%
Else 52.97% 45.40% 0.60% 0.97%
Yes, that’s a lot of numbers, I know. You want the full picture or not? I may boil this down to just the HDs and Commissioner Court precincts at some point or I may not, we’ll see. Just scan the numbers as you see fit and then read the analysis. I promise I will try to point out the highlights.
A couple of notes before we begin. For the Presidential and Senate races there were also write-in candidates, who collected 1,174 votes in the former and 296 votes in the latter. That works out to about 0.06% of the total Presidential vote and less than 0.02% of the Senate vote. As such, to make my life easier, I just skipped them all in the analysis. But if you noticed that the percentages here and in the next article don’t quite add up to 100, that’s the reason why.
Please note also that in general, Congressional, SBOE, and State Senate districts cover multiple counties. Indeed, only CDs 18, 29, and 38, and SDs 06 and 15 are entirely within Harris County. Prior to the last round of redistricting, that also included CDs 02 and 07, SBOE6, and SD07, but now CD07 also includes some of Fort Bend, while the rest reach into Montgomery. The numbers here just represent the Harris County portion of the district, which if you’re not careful can provide a very distorted picture of the district’s partisanship. Neither CD08 nor SD18 are remotely competitive, despite what the numbers above may appear to say. Please keep that in mind.
All right, let’s talk about the two items that should have leaped out at you: HD144 and County Commissioner Precinct 2. Obviously, it is Very Not Good that Trump carried them, and we’ll dig into that now and in future pieces. Rep. Mary Ann Perez was unopposed, as she had been in 2022. She received 26,000 votes, well more than either Presidential candidate, but that is always true of unopposed contenders. She first won HD144 in 2012, after it had been redrawn to be a little bluer, reflecting the trend it had undergone the decade before when it was Republican-held. She lost in a squeaker to a non-entity in the bloodbath that was 2014, then reclaimed it by 20 points in 2016. She won by 22 points in 2018, by 13 points in 2020, and hasn’t faced an opponent since.
That’s obviously going to change in 2026. I’m sure the results this year set off red alerts on the Republican side, and I hope for her as well. I have no idea what she’s thinking – there’s basically nothing election-related on her official Facebook page since then, and I’m not on any mailing list she uses. Far as I can tell, she acted like a typical unopposed candidate this year, which is to say she took it easy and wasn’t much of a presence on the campaign trail. She didn’t have to be, so why not? Well, for this reason – not taking care of business in your own back yard can lead to things going in ways you didn’t anticipate and wouldn’t like. Whatever her experience was these past couple of cycles, it won’t be in 2026 unless the Republicans commit political malpractice and fail to take advantage of an obvious opportunity. Which to be fair they might – complacency is always an attractive option – but I would advise Rep. Perez to not count on that.
I don’t mean to pick on Rep. Perez, because while her situation is more urgent she’s hardly the only elected official in Harris County, or anywhere Democrats still hold that office, who didn’t do much of anything to help themselves and their colleagues this past November. As I’ve said before, this is a situation we can’t tolerate any more. My mantra going forward is that the candidates and officeholders have to want this at least as much as the rest of us do. If they don’t, it’s on us to find someone who does and get them elected instead. There are lots of ways that an elected official can be an engaged presence in a campaign – field work, raising and spending money on campaign activities, social media, hiring and supporting people who will do good work on their behalf, etc. We should be looking for more of these things from our elected officials, starting right now, as we pick up the pieces and move on.
Again, it’s not just Rep. Perez – you can look at the numbers above and add in the names of other Reps who should expect a bumpier ride in two years. Some of them are already pretty active – Reps. Penny Morales Shaw, Jon Rosenthal, and Gene Wu, to name three for whom the Presidential numbers were less robust than they might have liked, can just keep doing what they’ve been doing. Others, some of whom might also face more of a challenge next time than they’re used to, should be looking in the mirror and giving serious thought to what their to-do list needs to be. Will any of that help in 2026 and beyond? Obviously, to some extent we’re captive to the national environment, but I trust no one is content with the idea of going down without a fight. Whatever we face from here, we damn well better face it with all of us fully engaged.
As for CC2, which has overlap with HD144, at least we know that Commissioner Garcia had a hard fight in both 2018 and 2022, so he’s in better shape for what is to come. He will also have plenty of opportunities to show his value directly to the voters, which helps. He’ll also have loads of money, and based on past history we would expect him to use it. So while the numbers in CC2 look worse, I’m less worried about him at this time. But the same message and concepts apply.
One last item to note, I was able to sort out the results from precincts within HISD and those that are not, and I’ll include that for future posts as well. The point was to make it clear that the results of the bond referendum, however you personally voted on it or felt about it, were driven overwhelmingly by Democratic voters. If Mike Miles and the appointed Board want to try again and get a different result, those are the voters whose concerns and issues they need to address.
There’s plenty more than can be said, and I’ll be talking about it in coming posts. If you have any questions or if there are any particulars you’d like to me to address, leave a comment and let me know. Thanks very much.
Looking at State House District 133. This is a red District. The percentages suggest that a lot of Rs did not vote for DJT. I wonder is this would have helped a D candidate had there been one in this election.